Issuu on Google+





theTeam Kristina Azarić | Architecture I Politecnico di Milano

Enrico Pinto | Architecture I Politecnico di Milano

Sanja Platiša | Architecture and Preservation I Politecnico di Milano

Federica Torri | Architecture - Building Architecture I Politecnico di Milano

Srna Tulić| Architecture - Architectural Design I Politecnico di Milano

Zeynep Tulumen | Architecture Construction and City I Politecnico di Torino

Matilde Valagussa | Architecture I Politecnico di Milano


Principal Academic Tutors Alessandro de Magistris I Politecnico di Milano Patrizia Bonifazio I Politecnico di Milano

Academic Tutors Alessandro Armando I Politecnico di Torino Gennaro Postiglione I Politecnico di Milano

Reference External Tutors Carlo Della Pepa, Comune di Ivrea Renato Lavarini, Coordinamento Cabina di regia per la candidatura di Ivrea, cittĂ  industriale del XX Secolo a Sito Unesco Irina Korobina, Schusev State Museum of Architecture, Moscow

Acknowledgments Stefano Pensa I Politecnico di Torino Bogdan Stojanovic I Politecnico di Milano Francesca Lanz I Politecnico di Milano





2.PROBLEM FRAMING 2.1 Cultural Heritage: from material culture to big data 2.1.1 Defining the Cultural Heritage 2.1.2 The Heritage change of meaning in over time 2.1.3 Heritage typology 2.1.4 Heritage nowadays: virtual materiality

11 12 12 16

2.2 Shifting perspective in the conception of ‘Museum’ 2.2.1 Towards a new image 2.2.2 Towards a new limit 2.2.3 Towards limitless 2.2.4 Towards a new communication 2.2.5 Towards new actors

16 16 17 18 18 19

2.3 City Museum Paradigm 2.3.1. City Museum case studies

20 21

2.4 The Birth of Virtual Museum 2.4.1.Virtual museum case studies

23 26

2.5 Cluster museum: a possible interpretation of culture 2.5.1. Cluster Museum examples

28 32

2.6 Synthesis network


2.7 Public spaces: the space of interaction between social/digital and individual/physical


2.8 Controlling the spatial experience with digital devices 2.8.1. Existing technology devices 2.8.2. Multisensory experience in physical space Multisensory experiences example 2.8.3. Mapping the space Mapping case studies

41 42 44 46 47 49

2.9 Ivrea – Moscow , two proposals 2.9.1 Moscow as a cluster museum 2.9.2 Ivrea as a cluster Museum

50 50 52

2.10 Why Ivrea 2.10.1 S.W.O.T. analysis

54 55

3. PROBLEM SOLVING 3.1 Stakeholders Identification /needs and requirements 3.1.1 Stakeholders Grouping 3.1.2 Identifying Values 3.1.3 Values Gap Analysis


3.2 THE MAP PROJECT 3.2.1 Mapping the heritage 3.2.2 Collecting data (social networks, UNESCO survey etc.) From Cultura materiale to Big data Strong and Weak documents How to draw a Map? The ingredients for a Map How to record? Analyzing data – Multicriteria analysis Added value 3.2.3 Interface

65 66 67 67 67 71 71 75 75 77 80

3.3 URBAN INTERVENTION 3.3.1. A grid of spatial experiences between digital and physical 3.3.2 Multisensorial installations 3.3.3 New interactions 3.4 Business Model Revenue model 5 Step model - how memoMAPP works?

3.5 Timeline of the Project Implementation

84 87 95 96 98 99 100










Abstract Theoretical approach: understanding and contributing to the debate of cultural heritage, from the material culture to big data. Answering to the question: what is a cluster museum? An interpretation - or selection - of this heritage, and therefore a political and non neutral statement. Showing examples of cluster museums and how they can vary according to the interpretation of citizens. Do all spaces represent a potential cluster museum? Can all objects be considered parts of cultural heritage? How to select the interesting datas from the not useful ones? We focus on museum clusters that are located in geographical proximity walking distance - even if they don’t have clear borders.nBut how to define the borders? Isn’t it more interesting if modern cluster museums have a blurry and flexible boundary? People need to be sensitized about public space: a space that needs to be appropriated, through movement, processes of discovery, sharing of information, meeting other people, adding knowledge, mixing cultures. Understanding and improving the relationship between the digital world and the public space. Mapping and geo-locating the heritage in a dynamic way, including instant information, such as tweets, Facebook posts, Instagram selfies, etc. Proposing a new way of relating to public and cultural space through the use of digital devices. Showing the importance of physical presence in the public space, through the use of all senses and the augmented skills of our digital devices. Providing a sort of grid, an infrastructure for urban furniture, occasional events, architectural elements, educational tools, sensorial paths, etc. This infrastructure must be perfectly compatible with the digital structure through which we can analyze and navigate the city. Keywords: -big data -live mapping -digitalization of heritage -cluster museum(s) -virtual / augmented reality



1 Introduction The use of digital technologies has possibility to add new interpretation layers and visitor interaction into physical spaces of museums, exhibitions, galleries and open, public spaces. Even today, technology is changing curatorial practices with use of mobile phones as guides inside the museums. The question that arises is ‘’what will cultural heritage be like in the future?’’ The answer is in the notion of phygital, physical + digital, bridging physical with the digital world. Digital technology will continue to become more integrated into our build environments while internet of things will lead to the internet of spaces. There is a constant need that heritage follows contemporary progress of technology, which does not mean that heritage will lose its valuable role in providing analog experience and direct access to real sites, rather it means that appeal of the analog world in a digital age will continue to grow, essential analog roots of heritage will embrace, while digital applications and methodology, will stand to make cultural heritage contents more engaging and provide unique users’ experiences. 1 As we are already using mobile applications to link physical and virtual spaces, the question is how the creation of apps will enable new users to interact more actively with the heritage, and to engage them with the curatorial process. Experiential learning, active and participatory agency have significant effect over the didactic delivery of ‘’facts’’, and in these notions is main potential of digital technologies to re-shape public relationship with heritage. Symbiosis of physical spaces of cultural heritage and digital world is inevitable process that already taken place and will continue to further develop as a part of the new age technology revolution.

1 1 A.Damala, P,Cubaud, A.Bationo, P.Houlier, I.Marchal. Bridging the Gap between the Digital and the Physical:Design and Evaluation of a Mobile Augmented Reality Guide for the Museum Visit. 2008 11

Problem Framing 2 This is the theoretical background of the overall project work where important concepts that led to the devolopment of the project were identified and called into question It starts with the description of cultural heritage, museum in general, city museum, cluster museum, virtual museum in particular and public space, which are the headstones of our project, from the exiting literature providing also some tangible examples. After a deep analysis of these themes the projects` point of view is proposed and our interpretation of these concepts together with the motivations and directions for the practical work that will arise consequently. We continue with the exploration of exiting technologies, which will help us to develop the physical project the next steps. The part concludes with the introduction of the two case studies which are Ivrea and Moscow from which we choose Ivrea as an empirical study where to turn our theoretical approach into a practical one.


2.1 Cultural Heritage From Material Culture to Big Data 2.1.1 Cultural Heritage definition: change of the meaning over time Cultural heritage is a concept without strictly defined boundaries and nowadays still with different theorization. The notion of heritage has changed during the history, interpreted in different historical periods and from different points of view. It has always developed and changed according to the contemporary societal context of transforming power relationships and emerging nascent national (and other) identities. The concept of heritage “has always been produced by people according to their contempo¬rary concerns and experiences”.1 Johnson and Thomas, for instance, simply note that heritage is “virtually anything by which some kind of link, however tenuous or false, may be forged with the past”2. Heritage from this point of view doesn’t seem a discipline with its complex corpus, but just a link between the past and the present. If so, the question is “whether we really need a tight definition at all, let alone a comprehensive ‘manifesto’ of what heritage studies is all about”.3 In heritage field, consequently, it is easier to consider the “scope” of heritage studies as a discipline, instead of searching for a specific meaning of the heritage concept. According to D. Harvey, “every society has had a relationship with its past, even those that have chosen to ignore it […]”4 Additionally, as Lowenthal argues, “heritage, far from being fatally predetermined or God-given, is in large measure our own marvelously malleable creation”.5 Although the heritage is something belonging to history, during the last century almost all researchers and intellectuals placed the appearance of the phenomenon in the latter half of the twentieth century, with even the earliest origins often manifested only in nineteenth century with the Ancient Monuments Act of 1882 and personified by such figures as William Morris. Having this in mind, the question that is imposed is: why the first notions of defining heritage are dated in the twentieth century, and why heritage is considered as a sort of product of the present? Tunbridge and Ashworth note that “the present selects an inheritance from an imagined past for current use and decides what should be passed on to an imagined future”.6 In other words, the only referent that matters is the present. Beyond the twentieth century belief, every historical period had its own present that 1 D.C. Harvey. Heritage pasts and heritage presents: Temporality, meaning and the scope of heritage studies. December 2001 2 P. Johnson B. Thomas. Heritage as business in “Heritage, Tourism and Society”. 1995 3 D.C. Harvey. Heritage pasts and heritage presents: Temporality, meaning and the scope of heritage studies. December 2001 4 Ibid. 5 D. Lowenthal. The Heritage Crusade and the Spoils of History. 1998 6 J. E. Tunbridge G.J. Ashworth. Dissonant heritage: the management of the past as a resource in conflict. 1996 14

Problem Framing

shaped its own heritage. Reflecting the thoughts of Tunbridge and Ashworth, ‘heritage’ is one of those things which everyone possesses, and which everyone will defend, seemingly without thought1. Heritage notion is, consequently, strictly connected with the people and communities, because it is related to memories. In this point of view different declination of heritage is implied, and the reason is the subjective sense of heritage that everyone owns. Heritage is a product of the social, cultural, political and economic transitions that have occurred during the later twentieth century. According to that, positive historical narrative is certified and shared by the whole community, but heritage is busily destroying it due to this bottom-up creation of heritage. P. Nora draws a distinction between two kinds of heritage: an elite, institutionalized memory preserved in the archives and recognized by the community, and the memory of ordinary people that belongs to a small group or family, unrecorded, and ingrained in the unspoken traditions and habits of everyday life.2 Most importantly however, Nora sees heritage as having been transformed, partly through technological and archival development, and democratized. “In this light, rather than viewing heritage as a false, distorted history imposed on the masses, we can view heritage sites as forming one link in a chain of popular memory”.3 Hewison has defined heritage as “that which a past generation has preserved and handed on to the present and which a significant group of population wishes to hand on to the future”.4 Consequently, heritage is “a contemporary product shaped from history.”5 It is subjective and filtered with reference to the present, whenever that ‘present’ actually is. This “shaping-action”, according to D. Harvey, is “a hand in hand transformation, rather than one of straight cause and effect”.6 The present is informed by the past and the past is reconstructed by the present”.7 As A.Boholm affirmed, “traditions are not static; they modify and change through time as a result both of their internal dynamic and in response to external demands”. As a reflection of historical period in which heritage is contextualized, in the era of virtual realities and big data, heritage has reached a new configuration. In Dodgshon’s point of view, technologies have led to a huge discovery of time, “both deep past time, through physics, geology, archaeology and history – and 1 Ibid. 2 P.Nora. Between Memory and History: Les Lieux de Mémoire. 1989 3 H. Johnson. Memory and heritage. 1999 4 D. Lowenthal. The Heritage Crusade and the Spoils of History. 1998 5 J. E. Tunbridge G.J. Ashworth. Dissonant heritage: the management of the past as a resource in conflict. 1996 6 D.C. Harvey. Heritage pasts and heritage presents: Temporality, meaning and the scope of heritage studies. December 2001 7 A. Boholm. Reinvented histories: medieval Rome as memorial landscape. 1997 15

Cultural Heritage

future time, through physics and planetary science”1 Modern technologies have led to a huge increase in the capability to store, categorize, interpret and present this broader deposit of time, and by that, have influenced also on the contemporary understanding of heritage. 2.1.2 Heritage Typology: heritage nowadays By UNESCO, “the cultural heritage may be defined as the entire corpus of material signs - either artistic or symbolic - handed on by the past to each culture and, therefore, to the whole of humankind. As a constituent part of the affirmation and enrichment of cultural identities, as a legacy belonging to all humankind, the cultural heritage gives each particular place its recognizable features and is the storehouse of human experience. The preservation and the presentation of the cultural heritage are therefore a corner-stone of any cultural policy.”2

Fig.1 Tangible and intangible heritage

The term cultural heritage encompasses several main categories of heritage: Tangible cultural heritage: . movable cultural heritage (paintings, sculptures, coins, manuscripts) . immovable cultural heritage (monuments, archaeological sites, and so on) . underwater cultural heritage (shipwrecks, underwater ruins and cities) Intangible cultural heritage: . oral traditions, performing arts, rituals Through history, information about heritage has been collected, and demonstrated through pictures and descriptive paragraphs in books, or as a part of museum exposition. With the development of technologies and internet, accessing heritage became easy, one click away, just by using our personal computer. In digitalization era, following tendencies that all material data are being transformed into digital, we also represent and access cultural heritage using digital tools. For example, multimedia in a museum is understood as a tool for interpretation of “real”, material heritage. Is it possible that this multimedia can be considered as expression in its own, not only as media, but as heritage itself? It is only recently that digital heritage has accorded status as an entity in its own right. The UNESCO Charter on the Preservation of Digital Heritage articulates this turn by creating a new legacy – the digital heritage: “resources of information and creative expression are increasingly produced, distributed, accessed and maintained in digital form, creating a new legacy – the digital heritage”.3 It is generally accepted that multimedia is perceived as extra feature, used to represent material objects. Following the new approach, it can also be seen as an object, replacing the “real object”, by offering the meaning in its own right, 1 R.A. Dodgshon. Human geography at the end of time? Some thoughts on the notion of time-space compression. 1999

2 Draft Medium Term Plan 1990-1995 (UNESCO, 25 C/4 1989) 3 UNSECO Charter on the Preservation of Digital Heritage 2003 16

Problem Framing

and also demanding interpretive reading. The shift in paradigm is that medium becomes the object made of social interactions, and not of real material. The relation between communities and heritage institutions is mediated through technologies. They cause a new ways of perceiving the world, and also make possible reshaping the power of institutions and organizations. They are a cultural construct and can be used on purpose to transform institutional cultures, and also relationship with audiences. For example, value of multimedia installation is that it engages in direct dialogue. If it is activated by the physical presence of the person walking around or through it, this makes the materiality of the installation more important. Experience offered is both physical and emotional. The added value that multimedia can have are the “affective possibilities” – by engaging emotions, it can produce different kind of knowledge, such as memory and empathy – they act as releasers of memory.1 Introducing the multimedia in the space of museum (Fig.3) is a tool that made possible emerging the new type of museum, not more an elite but democratized institution, with new relationships with audience. They make possible the creation of a space with specific physical and emotional characteristics that influence the user’s reading of displayed objects. Technology influences on experience of heritage, and also on understanding of it.

Fig.2 Heritage cycle: How we can make past part of the future? source: Simon Thurley, Into the future. Our stategy for 2005-2010. In: Conservation Bulletin [English Heritage], 2005 (49).

Following the transformation of material culture into bits, and change of perception and understanding of digital culture in relation with material one, can also offer and bring new perspectives in the area of representation of cultural heritage.

Fig.3 Introducing multimedia in the space of museums

1 A. Witcomb. The Materiality of Virtual Technologies: A New Approach to Thinking about the Impact of Multimedia in Museums in Theorizing Digital Cultural Heritage: A Critical Discourse. 2007 17

2.2 Shifting Perspectives: Museums From the very beginning, Hoeper-Greenhill argues, the public museum was shaped into being as an apparatus with two deeply contradictory functions: ‘that of the elite temple of the arts, and that of a utilitarian instrument for democratic education’. To which, she contends, there was later added a third function as the museum was shaped into an instrument of the disciplinary society. Through the institution of a division between the producers and consumers of knowledge - a division which assumed an architectural form in the relations between the hidden spaces of the museum, where knowledge was produced and organized in camera, and its public spaces, where knowledge was offered for passive consumption the museum became a site where bodies constantly under surveillance, were to be rendered docile.1 In 1970, Joseph Veach Noble in his book ‘‘Museum Manifesto’’, briefly described what he took to be the five basic responsibilities of every museum: to collect, to conserve, to study, to interpret, and to exhibit. He said: ‘They are like five fingers of a hand, each independent but united for common purpose.’2 Noble’s five-part analysis of museum functions has result remarkably useful as a base for an evaluative tool. It has supplied a series of perspectives and a framework from which museum’s performance might be systematically judged. Later on, after 20 years, a version of this new paradigm was first introduced by Peter van Mensch, the Dutch museologist. As analyzed by van Mensch, the essential functions of museums are reduced to three: to preserve (to collect, being viewed as simply an early step in that proves), to study (a function that remains unchanged) and to communicate (this third function being a combination of Nobel’s final two, i.e., to interpret and to exhibit).3 Fig. 4 Different theories about the role of Museum during history

In the length of time, it’s getting less rigid and more difficult to define the meaning and the responsibilities of a museum. The paradigm that shifted enormously starting from the end of 20th century is continuing to struggle in an identity crisis still today, and museums are in continuous seek for their real value and their underlying purpose. 2.2.1 Towards new image Museum, that is traditionally perceived as a container of objects and information, is transforming its duties. Thus, its meaning and place in the society is changing extraordinarily (Fig.5).

Fig. 5 Musuem image before and now: Container of information vs local community mediator

Today, museums are facing broader concepts of value. Values can be economic, political, social, emotional, educational, creative… Although the financial value is important, social and emotional values are going on top of the chain. This applies on creating strong local connections rather than touristic. The intention 1 T.Benett. The Birth of the Museum. 1995 2 J.V. Noble. Museum Manifesto. 1970 3 S.E.Weil. Rethinking the museum and other meditations.1990


Problem Framing

is to break the closed system and obtain a more meaningful and sustainable system that can keep the museums alive. This requires a strong emphasis on community, engagement and co-creation. As our understandings of the meaning of culture, collaboration, and participation is becoming more broad, and our communities are becoming more diverse, museums, as community gathering centers, take the responsibility to offer a wider range of program and audience engagement which makes them even more integral part of our daily lives. The new social identity of museum is increasing in importance, not only through activities that are proposed such as tours, seminars, workshops, festivals, but mostly because of the new characteristics of the space. This space, not necessarily physical, is not anymore to be attended in a specific time or date for an event, but a space which you can encounter by in your daily life, consciously or unconsciously. Museums are usually seen as the physical memory of the society, and what is being displayed contribute to the understanding of individuals and societies in the past, as well as contemporary cultures. Today, however, museums have also recognized the importance of responding and reflecting on more contemporary topics, collecting contemporary material and incorporating actual and future issues to its entity. Through real-time based material, tangible or intangible, that is incorporated into the museum context, the museum is connected with our daily life. In this way it preserves a more varied picture of the current state, and forms a base for a future oriented minds, as well as it answers to the challenge of being more responsive and active to what is unforeseeable and inevitable. 2.2.2 Towards new limit The traditional concept of a museum as a well-defined space is not an efficient model anymore. Future of museums do not lie on conservative spaces, but on more accessible, relevant and flexible spaces and realities. The new structure of museums is built on a large network based on collaborations between museums, libraries, city hall, universities, visitors, local communities, institutions etc. A museum is not a unique building, but a cluster of physical and non-physical networks that work simultaneously, making it more sustainable at its core (Fig.6). It is becoming more and more complex to trace relations regarding museum’s structure, collaborations, finances, and overall shared ‘purpose’. A museum could be defined in this way as an untraceable network of collaborations, and its limits expanded beyond its physical limits.

Fig.6 Collaborative institutions in the musuem network(s)

No other space can tell better the urban life of a place rather than the real urban space itself. Open-air museum process is set in motion through the museumification of our neighborhoods, particularly interesting neighborhoods, through the establishment of what could be called open-air exhibits. Museumification do not refer to an unchanging image of the city as an object to be conserved in a display case; on contrary, refers to a dynamic aspect of attributing museum-like characteristics to a place by equipping it with interpretive tools to communicate 19

Shifting Museums

easier to visitors what they are seeing and where they are, both in time and space. 2.2.3 Towards limitless: beyond the physical limits In a digitalized and globalized world, museum audiences increasingly experience knowledge as something created through blogs, wikis and other social platforms. New phenomena, like virtual museum (museum without walls), the internet of things and spaces, are breaking traditional limits of physical space and transforming museums to a flexible and dynamic organism which works on a vast limitless cyberspace. The phenomena ‘phygital’, which binds the digital with the physical world, can be considered as a compromise between virtual and physical environment. 2.2.4 Towards new communication Communication is the most important part regarding the actions of museums. This term, conventionally perceived as displaying objects, today is developing more into an experience-based action which aims to provide more engagement with artifacts and promote collaborations. This new perception results in giving way to new types of expression in museum design, incorporating new ways of presenting information, in the shape of various media or interactivity (Fig.7).

Fig. 7 Museum communication before and now: transition from “do not touch”sign, to interaction with the users

Fig. 8 Inzovu curve source: 20

Museums used to be institutions of authority that transmitted definitive messages to the public about past behind display cases with “do not touch” signs. Nowadays, they are predominantly turned into places that invite visitors to participate in an interactive and exciting journey. They have been transformed, from institutions where information was directed in only one way towards the visitor, into spaces that are progressively building conversations with the viewer. Visitors are invited to merge into the life of the museum, not only as passive bystanders, but also as active participants. Thus, interaction is a fundamental element for cultural institutions, and it shouldn’t be just intended as a connection created by increasingly popular modern technologies. Essentially, it should be a way to invite visitors to become involved in the life and the future of the museum and appropriate it as their own museum. Through diverse devices and tools, visitors are awaiting to be able to enrich and enhance their experience by seamlessly accessing multi-dimensional reality about the objects around them. Data about their visit can be captured and analyzed in real time in order to give a dynamic experience that responds to their needs. Moreover, they can react, participate and share these experiences with a global audience if they want. Besides multidimensional interactive experiences, museums are trying to create emotional experiences that inspire visitors to take action and promote the engagement between visitors and the museum. Some interesting tools such as the Inzovu curve (Fig.8), psychogeography, mental maps etc. narrate the journey of a person going through a transformative experience where various senses can be involved (sounds, smells, tastes…) Emotion-driven museum experiences will not only present the facts, but will provide connections and stimulate visitors to

Problem Framing

engage proactively in the sphere around them. Another simple way to attain a more engaged audience is personalization. Through personalized content or personalized access to content, it is increased the chance to encounter something relevant to people’s personal history. Visitors, that can answer some questions about themselves through provided devices and receive a customized plan for their visit, can go through personal explorations which engage them in dialogue with the museum. An outstanding example of this is Amsterdam DNA tour developed by Amsterdam Museum, which provides a customized overview of the city based on the interest of the visitor. It is a complex approach which requires different databases, redesigning of search engines and user interface. 2.2.5 Towards new actors For 21st century museums’ survival, communities play a key role, and the presence of tourists starts is becoming a secondary issue. More the unique sense of association and belonging to a museum increases inside the community, more the museum gains a real value. This is the reason why museums today make up a powerful segment of civil society and there is an ever-increasing need for them to reflect the needs and interests of their permanent visitors. They have to comply with new expectations and offer diverse opportunities to enable citizens’ active participation. Museums are becoming cultural networks that everyone is consciously or unconsciously part of. The meaning and value of the roles of curator and visitor, who were the main actors of a museum, is being transformed. Visitors are becoming more involved and integrated in museums each day. They are taking ownership of museums from old decision-makers (curators), playing a key role in contributing to curatorial decisions and developing new and diverse ways of sharing knowledge. The user, by selecting the desired features of the visit, becomes the curator. Even some of them are also “storytellers”, the ones who produce material to be included in the data collection.


2.3 City Museum Paradigm At the beginning, city museums were born as depository where the evolution and the memory of the city’s history is disposed. For example; at the end of XIX. Century, in The Carnavalet Museum of Paris and The Museum of the City of Brussels art objects witnessing the city history were collected and orginazed. Later, it changed it’s profile toward a place which provides ‘’a starting point for the discovery of the city, which can lead people to look with fresh, more informed and more tolerant eyes at the richness of the present urban environment and to imagine beyond it to past and possible future histories.’’ 1 Today, city museums are not just a casework of historical objects but a new opportunity for the future of the citizens and the city. This is a keypoint for the distinction between History Museum and the City Museum. Relatively, the first is orriented to the past while the second toward the present and future. City museum doesn’t need to belong to imposed institusions , public or private, but it overlaps with the three type of the museum which are; National, Civic, Private Museum. Mission of the City Museum ‘’A city museum is a museum about and in the city.’’2 Accepting that the city museum can not be all things to all people all of the time, however, does not absolve it of its responsibility towards all citizens. City museums is the possesor of diverse mission: • • • • •

Act as guardian of city treasures, and memory Present the soul of the city Put the present urban condition into cities historial context Encourage people to get involved in the shaping of their city Give people a opportunity to discuss city problems and city life.

The role of the curator gains a new important meaning in this context. Citizens and visitors become the new curators who can intercact and operate beyond the constraints of space and ideology with a freedom to explore an almost limitless range of interpretative approaches.

1 Nichola Johnson, ‘‘Discovering the city’’, Museum International No.187 2 S.Thielemans 2000, quoted by R.Kistemaker during the proceedings of the Fourth Conference of the International Association of City Museums, Amsterdam, 3-5 November 2005 22

Problem Framing

2.3.1 City Museum Case Studies

Museum of London London

The museum is a center of social and urban history. It aims to inspire a passion for London dealing with contemporary issues, talking about the story of the city not history. Engagement of every schoolchild is one of the main feature of the museum.

Museum Rotterdam Rotterdam

Museum Rotterdam has made big step towards participation in the last years, focused on contemporary heritage. They base their work on critics of object driven approach that is often present.

User contribution

The museum uses as an opportunity the identity of Liverpool and it’s global significance to regenarate the disregarded areas. It aims to be a contemporary landmark for both its citizens and tourist.


Use of interaction

The Museum of Liverpool Liverpool

Future oriented

The museum co-operates frequently with Art Academy in organizing workshops related to industrial heritage to advise local people understand more about it. Furthermore, the museum is sensitive to suburbs as it is to city center also.

Social Image

Daily experience

Muzeum Historyczne Warsaw

Social Value

Local connection


Civic dialogue



City Museum Paradigm

2.3.1 City Museum Case Studies

Pavillon de l’Arsenal Paris

The museum deals with the development of urbanicity and desire to increase the public understanding of the public understanding of the evolution and vision of the city. The museum tries to encourage people to get involved in the shaping of their city.

STA’M: Stadsmuseum Ghent

STA’M is a remarkable museum where whole city is presented from city center to suburbs. The citizens are invited to inspect the dimentions of the city including new developing places and on going projects.


User contribution

Museum of Copenhagen has done a set of research, projects, public interventions that transform the museum more significant in the daily life of the city. These are urban interventions that turn the museum into an urban element.

Use of interaction

Museum of Copenhagen Copenhagen

Future oriented

Amsterdam museum provides a customized exhibition path which allows the visitors to choose based on personal interest and available time. This is possibile thanks to the use of multimedia.

Museum Image Communication

Daily experience

Amsterdam Museum Amsterdam

Social Value

Local connection


Civic dialogue


Problem Framing

2.4 Virtual Museum Paradigm 2.4.1 The Birth of a Virtual Museum

The roots of virtual museums can be seen in their ’’web sites’’ and home pages on the internet created to circulate information about themselves. In this limited sense, virtual museums are just a part of promoting apparatus with the existing exhibition, the photographs and the guidebooks. Evolution of the virtual museum moved further with introducing the exhibitions for the internet users. Some sites such as the site of the University of California Museum of Paleontology in Berkley and the Science Museum in London are offering ’’virtual exhibitions’’. In order to define a virtual museum in its fullest sense we have to say that it represents complex structure that combines other notions, such as easy access, hyperlinking, interactivity and multimedia.1 The International Council of Museums (ICOM) defines the museum, as follows: ’’ A museum is a non-profit, permanent institution in the service of society and its development, open to the public, which acquires, conserves, researches, communicates and exhibits the tangible and intangible heritage of humanity and its environment for the purposes of education, study and enjoyment.’’ 2 The ICOM definition of a museum puts an accent on the material collection – tangible artefact, as the core of the mission since it distinguishes it from the world of television, theatre and advertising. A part of definition that is related to the notion of virtual museum is that museum is a space that communicates its messages to its audience, public, which overlaps with other media and traditional communication channels, as technologies are constantly progressing. The interconnection point where museum meets its virtual museum twin is in the institutional mission not only to collect and conserve the heritage but also to display it in order to facilitate study, education and appreciation of the material collection. With the progress of modern technologies museums recognized the value of Internet for their own existence. By Keeping up with technologies museums are providing worldwide publicity, communication channels necessary for museum organization, dialogue with professionals and public, while virtual visitors find exhibitions of their interests on the museums’ web sites. Museums are constantly working on providing a database, and even the Internet offers an alternative, cheap form of information it is likely to act as an attracting channel for prospective visitors who would like to see the original, real thing. Definition of S.Hazan and S.Harmon in their ‘’ V-Must Research Project’’ provides a synthesis of relevant notions for formation of a virtual museum: “A Virtual museum is a digital entity that draws on the characteristics of a museum, in order to complement, enhance, or augment the museum experience through personalization, interactivity, and richness of content.

1 ’’Virtual Museum’’Encyclopedia Britannica Online. Encyclopedia Britannica Inc.,n.d.Web 20.April 2016. 2 ICOM Statutes, adopted by the 22nd General Assembly (Vienna, Austria, 24 August 2007) 25

Virtual Museum Paradigm

Virtual museums can perform as the digital footprint of a physical museum, or can act independently, while maintaining the authoritative status as bestowed by the International Council of Museums (ICOM) in its definition of a museum. In tandem with the ICOM mission of a physical museum, the virtual museum is also committed to public access to both the knowledge systems imbedded in the collection sand the systematic, and coherent organization of their display, as well as to their long term preservation.”1 The difference between real and virtual museum that should not be neglected is the existence of the real and digital (reproduced) objects. Concerning this topic of unique existence, the virtual tours and exhibitions contribute to the field of spreading the cultural messages that museums are sending to their virtual visitors and increase the number of prospective museums’ visitors. It is an indisputable fact that Virtual Museums cannot replace real artifacts and original museum experience, but there are other aspects that have to be taken into consideration: • Stimulating the public to go and see the original work of art in museums • Possibility of including the other sensory experience, addressing sound, touch, or even olfactory, which should be inappropriate in a real museum • Provide orientation sense so exposed contents are easily found • Contextualize the artifacts • Visualize techniques used by artist for their artworks • Provide restoring and virtual reconstruction of artworks and sights of cultural interest • Create new representations in imaginary space of artifacts, that could be only virtually unified when a museum cannot expose them together • Offer museums’ and its exhibitions history in virtual space • Exhibit collections to wider, global audience • Show sights not exposed to public The concept of Virtual museum has two different definitions, where one indicates the existance of a digital version of already present collection, which could be defined as digital museum and other that indicates presence of an imaginary museum without the presence of its real museum correspondent.2 Today most physical museums have an online presence, with varying degrees of available online information. The information spectrum contents from simple contact, background information with a list of exhibitions to the museums that exist only in online world, or even those that have a physical building but at the same time they are offering wide range of online exhibitions, interactive online features, multimedia with searchable or browsable collections.

1 S.Hazan S.Hermon. On defining the Virtual Museum: A V-Must Research Project. 2014 2 G.Mura. Metaplasticityy in Virtual Worlds: Aesthetics and Semantic Concepts. 2011 26

Problem Framing

The use of telecommunication technologies offers many perspectives for further museums’ digital dimension development. As some statistics show the public still looks and appreciates museum information on the Internet but has high standards that the museums have to meet. The modern technologies represent a great opportunity that museums keep using for broadening their cultural offer and attracting new audience. Virtual museums exist only in online world, or even those that have a physical building but at the same time they are offering wide range of online exhibitions, interactive online features, multimedia with searchable or browsable collections. The use of telecommunication technologies offers many perspectives for further museums’ digital dimension development. As some statistics show the public still looks and appreciates museum information on the Internet but has high standards that the museums have to meet. The modern technologies represent a great opportunity that museums keep using for broadening their cultural offer and attracting new audience.

Fig.9 Diagram: Museums recognizing importance of digital technologies


Virtual Museum Paradigm

2.4.1 Virtual Museum Case Studies

Web Museum Paris, France

Virtual Museum of New France

- A pioneering virtual or web museum is the Web Museum, created by Nicholas Pioch. - It is hosted by ibiblio. - It still provides an excellent archival and educational resource of good quality art images and information, although it is no longer very actively updated. - Online since 1997. - Established by the Canadian Museum of Civilization Corporation. - The site includes interactive maps, photos, illustrations and information based on current research into New France.

The Science Museum London, United Kingdom

Ljubljana Open-Air Museums, Ljubljana, SLovenia


- Online since 1999. - Was able to establish an early web presence due to the proximity of Imperial College. - Online representation of a museum representation offers: online exploring of the collections, online games, science museum apps and a blog. - Online since 1996. - Ljubljana was presented as a huge museum where streets were the exhibitions of the architecture and building interiors were museum rooms. The method of the presentation were interactive maps and interactive virtual reality panoramas. The aim of the project was to create “3D like� virtual visit of the museum.

User contribution



Future oriented


Daily experience

(online sine 2000)


PIONEERS of Virtual Museum concept

Database construction

Project Value Time orientation Communication

Problem Framing

International Museum of Women

An online-only museum that does not have a physical building and instead offers online exhibitions about women’s issues globally as well as an online community.

Girl Museum

An online-only museum that does not have a physical building and instead offers online exhibitions that celebrate girlhood in the past and present. A virtual museum for the research, preservation, and presentation of girl culture. Offering online internships for students interested in this topic.

Google Art Project

User contribution

The museum presents recordings of audio- and video-recollections of witnesses of Soviet repression in Belarus. The museum is operated by historians and other scientists from Belarus, based on a private initiative. It started collection of materials in 2007 and is operabl since 2014.


Virtual Museum of Soviet Repression in Belarus

Future oriented


Daily experience




Database construction

Project Value Time orientation Communication

Since 2011, an online compilation of high-resolution images of artworks from galleries, as well as a virtual tour. - Includes works in the Tate Gallery, London; the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York City; and the Uffizi, Florence.


2.5 Cluster museum Defining a Cluster Museum as a possible interpretation of culture The museum within its traditional understanding is considered a paradigm of the postmodern city1 and a symbol of the display culture in which we live. Its beginning is grounded on three main characteristics: museological, architectural and urbanistic; or in other words, it is based on its collection, its building and its place. Throughout its history and mainly in the recent years, along with the construction of museums there is an on-going process of their organisation and grouping that resulted in the formation of museum clusters. In order to understand what a cluster museum is, it is fundamental to first define a cluster itself. The concept of clusters was first introduced in 1990 by Michael Porter where the idea of clusters was addressed as “a geographically proximate group of interconnected companies and associated institutions in a particular field”2. This type of collaboration creates a stable structure and produces efficiency and flexibility for the community. Within the cluster, companies or institutions can be stimulated to become more competitive, creating a new economy of competition. Furthermore, according to the theory of multiple nuclei proposed by Harris and Ullman3, certain zones or activities tend to locate where they are most effective, the most desirable and financially most viable. The best examples of culture clusters are to be found in cultural districts4. The cultural district is defined as ‘a well-recognized, labelled, mixed-used area of a city in which a high concentration of cultural facilities serves as the anchor of attraction. Typically, the area is geographically defined and incorporates other land uses, but the defining characteristic is the concentration of cultural facilities and related activities’5. The concentration of cultural institutions in large cities has enabled these institutions to benefit from economies of agglomeration: unit costs can be reduced when institutions are able to share resources. If we take the relations from physics – like density, critical mass and distances – we can stress and explain the physical character of a cluster, while with the new parameters from economy, like Porter’s cluster theory we can contribute to a more broad understanding of the mechanisms and impacts on static and dynamic structure of the museum cluster, the museum and the city. Thus looking at a basic definition, a museum cluster is a physical concentration of museums on one location. Of all expressions which can denote a group of museums, this one was selected due to the emphasis on the environments and processes, relations and dynamics that today promote economic agglomeration and knowledge. Moreover, with this we move urban boundaries of cluster museums and the perception of their logic, influence and resources. 1 M. Nikolić. Ciudad de museos. Clústeres de museos en la ciudad contemporánea. 2011 2 M.E. Porter. Clusters and the New Economics of Competition. 1990 3 D.Chauncy E.Ullman. The Nature of Cities. 1945 4 H.A. Frost-Kumpf. Cultural Districts: The Arts as a Strategy for Revitalizing our Cities. 1998 5 Ibid 30

Problem Framing

Apart from clusters, museums in the contemporary definition(s) tend to function also in networks. Under the network we include a complex group of interconnected systems. In the case of museums, we can be consider three levels of networking. In the section of the spatial distribution and institutional organization, a museum or a museum-network-system has developed, with multiple seats and facilities, in a city, region, country or internationally (e.g. Louvre, Guggenheim etc.). Therefore a museum cluster becomes a place of crossing and potential cooperation between the branches of the museum complex networks, network of museums and systems, which reflect the interaction in the public space. In urban terms, the city will form a network cluster of museums, as a constant response to social mobility, with the potential to bind parts of the city in the whole concept of unity and renewal. Accordingly the complexity of the cluster system requires an explanation of the notion of cultural infrastructure. By definition, cultural infrastructure consists of institutions of culture and higher education, and public spaces of the city. With the creation of networks that museums project in the city, the city becomes the centre of interaction of clusters. The museum still maintains a privileged place and a role of “social condenser” as nowadays a museum in a cluster changes itself in all of the urban scales. The museum is modelled along the lines of urban planning; today’s universal museum is a museum-cluster or museum as the city. The cluster museum is not a one-dimensional phenomenon like the museum itself before. This is a public cultural and urban phenomenon, as well as social, symbolic, political, economic and now, increasingly a tourism and marketing wonder. Throughout the previous historical stages we can see the continuities and changes in their urban notion and interaction within the public space, as well as the role and the place that they have in the city and the city’s development. With grouping, museums introduce an order in the museum organisation and the urban landscape, altering themselves to its topography and morphology, and defining an own typology of urban spaces. Therefore the museum clusters and systems establish many polysemic relations6 with their environment, which determines their physical place within the city. Clusters in contemporary cities with their place and relationship with the city take the priority over its museographical and architectural side. According to new definitions7, the physical concentration of museums reaches the “cluster effect” only if in the common space the museums participate in joint activities and if the grouping gives them added value. The public space becomes a vital element in the mobilization and visibility of the museum cluster; it becomes a crucial mediator between the museums and the city, between different audiences and functions, spaces and flows, between the slow and the fast, the old and the new, the fun and the educational, the com6 Canter, D. (1977). The Psychology of Place 7 Shane, D.G. (2008). Heterotopias of Illusion; From Beaubourg to Bilbao and Beyond 31

Cluster Museum

mercial and the immaterial, the order and the unexpected, between the utopian city and the city in which we live. Hence connecting themselves in groups, the museum clusters create the “city of museums” as a cultural and instructive setting in the new scale of the city. Uniting museums in cluster, the public spaces establishes the knot between them and the city8, reflecting the intricacy of intangible relations that the museum has with the society. Unlike clusters in other industries, which may include regions and networks, cluster museums have clear physical guidelines, adapted to the urban form and change it. Reflecting from its place, the multiple roles and the impacts on the city, the various aspects of urban cluster of museums reveal the spatial complexity: •

the physical concentration of museums

architectural urban complex

conglomerate spaces on the surface, in the amount and under the earth

element of system museum

element of the systems of public space

element of the urban neighbourhoods or quarter alone

element of the urban structure of the city

Based on the already mentioned definition of Porter on clusters in economies, the Belgian museologist Francois Mairesseu identified the key components of the museum cluster to be: •

the common space

the common action

The increasingly significant role of museums was marked by the growth of the so-called “superstar museums”. This lead to having the common denominator of the 21st century museum to be the cluster. The museum boom, by generating, altering, and accentuating museum clusters, characterises a revolution in the relationship and conception of the museum and of the city. Therefore superstar museums became the must see destinations on the tourist itinerary and all have played an important role in the redevelopment of their particular cities (e.g. Bilbao, Vienna, Paris etc.) The cluster of museums are raised in the rank of the urban manifesto9, as it demonstrated that new models of the museum are a manifestation of changes in the society and the culture.

8 N. Privileggio. Infrastrutture, architettura: alcune precisazioni. 2006 9 D.G. Shane. Heterotopias of Illusion; From Beaubourg to Bilbao and Beyond. 2008 32

Problem Framing

The cluster spreads and revolutionizes the idea of the museum and of the place. The museums create the urban place also through dynamic relations and interactions, among themselves and with the city, as significant constituents of the urban feature of the museum and its connecting role.

Fig.10 Diagram: visualisation of the the top 9 museums in the worlds related to the #museumselfie - bigger the dots, the more mentions it got on Instagram


Cluster Museum

2.5.1.Cluster Museum case studies Collection typology



MuseumsQuartier Vienna

12 museum buildings, open space installations, historical gardens, shops, caffes

Modern and contemporary art, performance art, architecture, fine arts, theatre

TheMET New York

3 museum sites in New York

Fine arts, contemporay arts, library

Schusev State Museum of Architecture Kremlin castle and other historical buildings, few museums, Melnikhov house and soviet heritage, underground Place metro, architecture heritage

Architetcure museum, fine arts, preservation center, historical heritage, monuments

Bologna City Museum

12 musuem sites

Archaeology, antique arts, modern/ contemporary art, heritage, history and memory

The Tate London

4 art galleries in London Modern and and three in wider contemporary art, England research centers, consrvation institute, learning spaces

Site Zollverein

Industrial dismissed elements, 2 museums, open entrerntainment areas

Relation Effect on with the city public space

Industry heritage, art museums, design museums, theatre center, park and swimming pool areas

defined physical boundry disperesed in the city linear line


regeneration of public space no effect as it defines it homogenity of public space ongoing process

Problem Framing

Complementary Complementary Cluster Common Before clus- Cluster as Objectives content-onsite content-digital component action ter heritage heritage

Some elements are protected city patrimony

UNESCO Industrial Heritage on-site / open space technologies e.g. electronic billboards, interactive furniture, digital facades etc.

museum apps, future digital archives, live channels, virtual architectures, QR code pins in urban space, AR apps etc.

physical concentration common space architectural complex urban structure in city

enhance history induce civic dialogue future oriented knowledge museum as daily experience user as curator reproduce physical space


Cluster Museum

2.5.1.Cluster Museum case studies Collection typology



Smithsonian Museum in Washington

16 musuems, a ZOO, 9 research facilties

History, arts, crafts, culture, air and space, natural sciences, technology, research facilities, ZOO

MuseumInsel Berlin

5 museums

Antique arts and heritage, sculptures, fine arts

Lincoln Center New York

7 performing arts build- Dance, opera, ings, school of music theatre, concerts, school of music, exhibiton areas, annual festival venues

Place Paseo del Prado Madrid

4 museums

Fine arts, contemporary arts, installations, sculptures

Jianchuan Museum Cluster

15 museum sites outside the city of Chengdu

historical and cultural artefacts from different eras

Relation Effect on with the city public space

defined physical boundry disperesed in the city linear line


regeneration of public space no effect as it defines it homogenity of public space ongoing process

Problem Framing

Complementary Complementary Cluster Common Before clus- Cluster as Objectives content-onsite content-digital component action ter heritage heritage

UNESCO Heritage as cluster

on-site / open space technologies e.g. electronic billboards, interactive furniture, digital facades etc.

museum apps, future digital archives, live channels, virtual architectures, QR code pins in urban space, AR apps etc.

physical concentration common space architectural complex urban structure in city

enhance history induce civic dialogue future oriented knowledge museum as daily experience user as curator reproduce physical space



Problem Framing

2.6. Synthesis Network

imposed point of view

daily experience

univocal direction of knowledge

local connection

city museum

conservative approach

civic dialogue

enhance public space

added value to heritage

closed boundaries

overlying function

open boundaries future oriented


need for recognazable elements

cluster museum

dependence on physical space


dependence on distances



lack of civic dialogue

reduce the distances

virtual museum

no need for physical space

common action immateriality

database construction

Fig.11 Diagram of common relations between museum typologies


2.7 Public Space as part of culture The space of interaction between social/digital and individual/physical In the general interaction between the museums and the city, the museum cluster is built as a public space. It redefines the notion of public sphere and visibly demonstrates its allocation from the public institutions into the public space. In this public transformation, the urbanistic dimension of the museum in the museum cluster obtains the primary importance1 and establishes itself as the very process of grouping, as the coming-out of the museum into the city and as the coming-in of the city into the museum2. The public space becomes an important element in the mobilization and visualisation of the museum cluster, it highlights the great importance of the connections between the components of the museum system, the importance of accessibility, circulation, relations, flows and systems they establish. When a space becomes more than the sum of its parts, it becomes a place3. Place-making is the act of creating great places by making a public space a living place4. The objective is that ‘‘all public spaces should become places and have the same value and strength. Open public spaces can be defined as central places of community in civilized society, which are dependent on a certain level of shared experiences and expectations of users5. Adriana de Souza e Silva6 gives a rather important insight into the urban reality of the 21st century, pointing out that modern cities represent hybrid spaces where borders between urban physical and digital space are blurred by ICT. Thus, the role of IC technologies and importance of their networks should be reassessed since they have become indispensable ingredients of urban life. Urban media is a collective term for all the technologies that in one way or the other can influence the experience of a physical location. When we talk about new technologies, it is often about their practical application: technology is presented as a convenient solution to real or supposed problems, it promises to make our lives more pleasant and convenient; at the same time, our cities will also become safer, more sustainable and more efficient. Therefore, two main scenarios prevail: the “smart city” and the “social city”. A smart city is crammed with sensors, software and networks that enable optimal traffic circulation and energy use. The smartphones are the intelligent compasses, guiding the city dwellers through the bustle and chaos of everyday (Fig.12). Due to its increasing takeover on social life, American architecture critic and social city idea supporter Paul Goldberg claims that people who walk down the streets using their phones are no longer participating the street life. In order to fully understand the relation between technologies and the influence of digital 1 Welter, V.M. From locus genii to heart of the city. Embracing the spirit of the city 2 Nikolić, M. Ciudad de museos. Clústeres de museos en la ciudad contemporánea / City of Museums. Museum Clusters in the Contemporary City 3 Anderson E. Placemaking: A Tool for Rural and Urban Communities 4 Placemaking and Place-Led Development: A New Paradigm for Cities of the Future

Fig.12 Smart City Concept

5 Crawford, M. The World in a Shopping Mall 6 De Souza e Silva, A., Frith, J. Locative mobile social networks: mapping communication and location in urban space


Problem Framing

on public realm, we must consider how urban media are qualitatively changing the experience of the urban public sphere. The dichotomy of public spaces has become a reality causing numerous changes in urban typology and redefining spatial, social and technological demands. Nowadays, public space must offer a safe and secure setting for spontaneous displays of social life, especially for citizens within local communities. On the other hand, the nature of digital space gives an illusion of autonomy and privacy, since its user can choose a favoured 'group', define and create 'borders', select a 'protection' and express his/her own opinion (Fig.13). With the use of ICT the city becomes an interface. This can be related to Manuel Castellas writings that a city is the material reflection of social relationships and thus crates places where individuals can relate to these social representations. But only if we consider still the needs and the way the cities are lived by people. The creation of the so-called “intelligent environment” can provide interactions between users avoiding the black scenarios of smart cities where all social ties have been broken and there is no physical meeting between people. There are numerous cases around the world in which the application of principles of both digital realms and good public space uses showed successful. To promote its travel service, the railway company SNCF teamed up with the advertising agency TBWA Paris creating an adcampaign called ‘Europe, It’s Just Next Door’. In an amusing and creative way, it sends pedestrians to other European cities—simply by opening brightly coloured doors with the names of cities. The interactive doors were positioned across various tourist locations in Europe and all around Paris. Each door hid full-bleed LED Screens which are connected live to other parts of Europe, transmitting specific cultural attractions. When opened, the doors displayed real-time events happening in those cities (Fig.14) Consequently, pedestrians in Paris were able to open a "door" containing a digital screen and take part in characteristic activities in Barcelona, Milano etc. The space can be reflected as more abstract term than the place. It describes broader three-dimensional reality in which we life. 3D Google maps, Bing maps, open source maps, birds eye and streets view of cities, walking virtual city tours etc. enable us to simultaneously be in several places or visit them without leaving the present location and 'real presence'. Nevertheless, the existing technologies and their many uses and displays, become an important element of urban culture. The specific urban situation has an important influence on the design of technologies and their performances, increasing the interaction of city, society and technology, but also stimulating and promoting urban and technological innovations. The uncertainty of the contemporary reality has been expanded and replicated in public space. Thus, each of the overlaying realities (digital or physical) provides certain advantages and disadvantages, which might match, coincide or neglect each other. Their features display nearly infinite potentials which could be achieved in a hybrid public space(s).  

Fig.13 LG augmented reality 3D browser on Optimus 3D

Fig.14 SNCF adcampaign ‘Europe, It’s Just Next Door’, 2013

Fig.15 Digital Water Pavilion in Zaragoza by Carlo Ratti Associati, 2008 41

Public space

Table 4. Digital vs Physical space

Even though technology is still causing many unclear ideas and it tends to misrepresent human awareness, it is apparent that its power directs our world towards the virtual and very fast-changing future. Our everyday life is overexposed with the use of technological gadgets that facilitate our work, our life and our actions. However, the material features of physical world still characterize the roots of our urban identification, offering tangible background for our activities and active urban processes. Consequently, it is visible that digital replacements cannot completely substitute urban nodes of meeting, communication and intellectual exchange, but they have to be integrated into traditional and new urban functions and spaces. The open public spaces, conventionally considered as nodes of social interactions between people, as well as places where people come to see other people and to be seen, will surely follow this course of development and upgrading. Thus, the increasing social networks will be just one of numerous elements of open spaces of the future, which will request a complex architecture of existing and emerging networks - created by and for people.


Problem Framing

2.8 Controlling the spatial experience with digital devices The tendency is that real world keeps “moving� to virtual one, creating a specific digital city in order to efficiently and effectively manage needs, desires, interests and values, using all benefits of digitalization process: 1. Efficient reaction and feed-back; 2. Easy accessibility and constant presence of all resources (human, natural, artificial,financial, logistic, etc.) 3. Great interconnectivity of all actors, stakeholders and spatial systems; 4. Full time-based inter-connectivity of all actors; 5. Transparency and accessibility of all real resources using digital world and upgrading the real one using digital society;1 The beginning of the XXI century represents an extremely interesting period for museums development, in terms of new engaging exhibits following the technological development. Present technologies offer museums unique opportunities to meet the increasing expectations of their visitors, many of whom are belonging to the young generation that is growing up in the digital age. Today digital spaces are ubiquitous, moving from the applications on smartphones to tablets which are linked with the Internet through a wireless network to gesture-based interaction with large screens. Constantly more things are being connected to the Internet and being brought to the road of the digital space. Digital devices allow people to do the certain things, and spatial experience that is developed by those devices contains artificial agents that change over time. Digital spaces are volatile in their function, and that is where the main development opportunity lies. Thus, the digital area that we live in, has created a group of tools that are constantly changing the way how we share and absorb the relevant information. Nowadays, no organization is exempt from disruption caused by technological innovation progress, neither does cultural sector. Digital Devices for Museums Following the technological progress museums are incorporating the latest technologies, in order to provide better offer for their visitors. Museums websites contents vary, but as a main part of their online offer, there are: games, image databases, online shopping experience, videos, calendar of events and unavoidable social network connections. Interpretative tools within the physical galleries include digital kiosks, digital labels and iPads, and tours that are now mobile, multimedia and digital.

1 M. Ralević. The Routs of Digitalization from Real to Virtual City and Vice Versa. 2016 43

Controlling spatial experience

Fig.16 The Use of Near Field Communication Technologies in Museums

2.8.1. Existing Technology Devices

Near Field Communications (NFC) Technology for Museums and Exhibitions Near Field Communication as a short range wireless communication technology facilitates mobile phone usage of billions of people throughout the world, that offers diverse services ranging from payment and loyalty applications, access keys for houses and offices and as such, it found also application in cultural heritage field, inside the museums and as a part of interactive urban space. With NFC tags visitors are able to make a reservation, request a place in a ’’virtual queue’’ so even this act becomes virtual oriented , NFC tags provide visitors quicker information sharing via social media such as Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn, on the other side the NFC tags represent opportunity for promotional e-vouchers to build customer loyalty. The Potential of Beacon Technology Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) beacons are providing mobile app developers and businesses with new opportunities. This technology found its application in various spheres of life, with wide range of possibilities to be applied within cultural heritage field. As the visitors are moving around inside the museum these devices can provide updates so museum’s application alerts the visitors about the upcoming event taking place, just as they are passing by the auditorium or workshop area. On the other side beacons can provide valuable information about the users’ experience and visitors behavior. Entire visitors’ visit can be tracked and data about the duration of stay and visited sections, is being collected. Analyzing the collected users‘ information museums can work on improve44

Problem Framing

ments of their exhibit locations and museum layouts, and everything in order to enhance the overall museum experience. Using beacons at entry halls, museums can put behind the traditional entry tickets procedure. With a simple position system at the entrance, visitors can pay for their visit hands free, without pulling out their wallet or smartphone. This will eliminate waiting in long queues for purchasing entry tickets. Pass holders are easily recognized and they pass without having to wait, the very same system can be implemented in concept of museum gift shops. Self-experience or self-guided tours are another valuable opportunity that beacons are offering. By placing beacons on specific, strategic points inside the museum, approaching visitors receive information about the exhibition directly on their smart phone screens. The visitors are free to experience the museum at their own pace, spending more time with the exhibit that is appealing to them, rather than following strict guided walking tours. Educational benefit is without any doubts present with this technology, for students and also art lovers. Students experience can be enhanced with rich interaction via tablet devices, with which they are able to locate themselves, follow directions, take notes, sketch and interact with their fellow students through notes and chat options. Thus, with beacons, visitors are regaining a sense of a place, since it is providing them with a feeling of engagement and attachment to the physical space. Considering the above mentioned potential uses of ibeacon technology, it is quite evident that implementation of this technology in the case of museums has no limits. Synthesis of Virtual and Physical Environment New spatial layers of mixed environment, where virtual meets physical in urban space are additional optional activities in open public space, with the potential to continuously upgrade the social activities in urban sphere. The basic element of digital urban spaces is the physical space. Thus, the aspects of digital are in fact only an upgrade or expansion as a part of the physical sphere.This extension gives new meaning to the physical space. It impacts the people in terms of the use of space and also provides the greater freedom of choice with backward influence on the physical form.2 All additional layers composing the mixed environment enhance the synthesis of physical space and virtual reality, at the same time they also represent additional optional activities in open public space, with the potential to constantly upgrade the activities withing the social sphere. The model of mixed environment offers various ways of how potential users can interact with it. Each one of those interaction involvs active or passive interaction, where user is directly chossing the options from the pallet of offered virtual layers. 3 Thus, users have to understand and perceive the mixed environment within the open public space in order to use it and interact with one higher level of knowledge than if they were using only the physical environment. The users are given freedom in choosing their own path, as they are put in the epicenter of public space. 2 A.Djukić. Mixed Reality Environment and Open Public Space Design. 2016 45

Controlling spatial experience

2.8.2 Multisensory experience in physical space Even if designers and users might consider the visual perception as the prevalent sense, all the other senses should be considered when undertaking a design project. For example, touch has always played an important role in the appreciation of products and public space. Nowadays, thanks to the development of smartphones and mobile devices, we are getting used to control our digital and physical world through the slight movement of our fingers. Children learn the importance of touch from the very beginning or their education, using it as a tool to understand and communicate even before they are able to control the other senses. Tactile feelings are very important for children also in the context of museums: it has been tested(1) that in a museum where they can’t touch anything they are more likely to get bored soon than a museum that provides a “full body” interaction. But touch is also fundamental for the elderly people or the disabled population, especially when other senses are partially or completely absent. On the other hand, for the same reasons mentioned above - like the growth of internet-based shopping and digital applications - people are getting detached from the physical world and its tactile reality, relying solely on the other senses, mostly sight. For example, the appreciation of an architectural project is now only based on the visualization of breath-taking pictures that are digitally modified and then published on the internet. While the appreciation of a painting might even be augmented by the support of digital technology (e.g. the amount of detail perceivable through Google Cultural Application), there are still some qualities of artifacts that can’t be transmitted through the screen of our mobile devices, like the smoothness of a sculpture, the texture of a material, the comfort

Fig.17 Layering of sensory experiences


Problem Framing

of an ergonomic chair, the cold temperature of a railing, the warmth of a bench in the sun, etc. In the same way, hearing can considerably affect the way we experience the space: the feeling we perceive in a crowded street or an inner courtyard is mostly generated by the presence or absence of loud noises, but also specific sounds that our brain associate with specific emotions, like the stream of water, the calls of birds, the flow of cars, the shout of peddlers, the sound of wind, etc. Hearing is important also as it regards the contact with the paving: walking on pebble stones or on a wooden surface produces a completely different feeling of the space, with different levels of comfort and appreciation. Also smell plays an important role in the urban experience. Even if it might seem difficult to notice, the geographical conditions, the weather, the species of flora, the quality of infrastructures, the materials, the social and ethnical composition of the neighborhood, the local cuisine, etc, are all factors that might influence the visitors experience and activate long-lasting relations in people’s mind. Indeed smell can connect us with places we visited in the past, people we don’t see anymore and food we tasted when we were young. This might explain why there has been such an evident trend in including all senses in many fields of design, but also in the fields of marketing, psychology and cognitive neuroscience. Nevertheless, most of these researches have only tried to evoke tactile sensations via the visual and auditory modalities. Instead, thanks to kinetic technologies and their interaction with touch-screen devices, the use of all senses could be an even more important tool to connect the virtual world with the physical one. For example, visiting a site with virtual reality can show us how different it is to see through the screen of a device than to actually be in the place and experience all its qualities. After the “awe-inspiring” effect of being “catapulted” in a totally different reality, we can immediately notice the lack of some essential inputs that we usually associate with living in the public space. For these reasons, also touch, smell and hearing should be carefully considered when starting a design project, especially when it has to implement a digital platform like the MeMoMAPP.


Controlling spatial experience

Multisensory experiences Case studies




Aperture, designed by Berlin-based studio TheGreenEyl: a facade screen prototype that can react to the presence and movement of people, emitting a distinct mechanical sound. This installation is made of electrical diaphragms similar to those found in cameras that are arranged in a grid and form a membrane. Incoming light causes the irises to close while relative darkness makes them open up.

Sea Organ

Sea Organ in Zadar, Croatia, designed by architect Nikola Bašić: an experimental sound intervention that turns the waves of the sea into a large musical instrument. Citizens and tourists can enjoy the waterfront of the city with this magical sound - probably never heard before - and discover a completely new relationship with the natural element of the sea.

Light brix

Light brix, designed by French studio HeHe: a modular light system that responds to touch: through the electromagnetic fields of the human body. The hexagonal units can be assembled in any shape and modulated to compose multiple lighting situations.

Shalekhet-Falling leaves

Sculptural installation in the Memory Void (Menashe Kadishman), one of the empty spaces in Berlin Jewish Museum that evokes a dramatic period of history and collective pain through the use of 10,000 open-mouthed faces coarsely cut from heavy, circular iron plates cover the floor. Powerfully tries to give an architectural expression of the irretrievable loss of the Jews murdered in Europe, evoke a painful recollections of the innocent victims of yesterday, today, and tomorrow.

Brass tubes

Permanent installation by Alberto Garutti, in piazza Gae Aulenti, Milan: the playful urban element is made of twenty-three brass tubes that run through the four floors of underground parking ramps, and “emerge” from a large void to connect with each other through the voices, sounds and noises. The long title of the art piece explains the reasons on itself: “This work is dedicated to those who pass this will think the voices and sounds of the city”.


Lift-bit, designed by Carlo Ratti Associati and developed with the support of Vitra: a revolutionary sofa design that can adapt to the user preferences with the use of a very intuitive app. The object, consists of a series of modular hexagonal stools, which are easily reconfigurable through the Internet-of-Things (IoT) technologies. A linear actuator allows every element to be raised or lowered, creating a very flexible solution for future lifestyles.


Problem Framing

Mapping Space

2.8.3 Mapping the Space Mapping, which is a critical action, is accelerating through a new path. Today, everything that is happening around us can be mapped and therefore can be recorded. Continuously developing digital technologies are able to map the physical space in any aspect, not remaining limited by a portion of the earth on a plane surface; but creating a new dynamic network in four dimentional space. Mapping is turning itself to a decision making tool, especially in urban planning but not only, by extracting all kinds of information’s such as; geographical data, real-time data, sounds, emotions, perceptions, etc. from our urban space and life,and putting them together to understand better the urban space and human behaviors. The new availability of rich and big data on human activity and urban space give possibility to fill the gap, exclusively to gain new visions in the present and future use of the urban space. Thanks to emerging tools such as GIS technologies; interactive patterns can be created, spatial information can be analyzed, data can be edited and updated easily and the result of these actions can be presented. The action of mapping which is converting a physical space in to virtual space, is literally giving possibility to people in experiencing a physical space from a virtual space. Therefore it must be considered as a powerful tool for the transformation of a physical space. The terms “space” and “architecture” can be referred both to the physical dimension and to the web. Analogies are many: for instance, we can talk about address in terms of geo-localization of a place in the city, or to find a specific page in the web. The relationship between the two dimensions is an issue new to the recent debates on the network society era. The architect Carlo Ratti declared: “We are going to talk about virtual space as we use to talk about the physical one…”. But how to draft and compare their layouts? Interaction present a common structure. Shifting from a “room” to another one, and viceversa, is perhaps more intuitive then it seems: we are daily used to move from a web page to another by just clicking on links, hashtags, bottons, through a QR- code, or querying labels and places on Google Maps. All these actions are means of transport to move in the virtual space as walking through a door in the physical one: these tools are “portals”. What is fundamentally different is the criteria which leads us in choosing our path, the navigation method and orientation patterns. A web research engine, despite the adopted interface, works by precise selection language (SQL language) based on mathematical logics. When we move in the real space, the direction is influenced by many physical factors: prior needs, emotions, difficulty, good or bad knowledge of the path, climate conditions, time available and most of all… distance factor still matter! This is the main point: physical architecture is ruled by geographic position; virtual architecture does not have an intuitive disposition, the layout is concealed, but it is ruled by a simple and clear logic.


Controlling spatial experience

The introduction of GPS technology and navigation systems was a revolution: virtual orientation pattern was applied to the physical navigation, with all the advantages of fastness and ease of use combined with the understandable and intuitive layout of a geographical map. XXI century generation is going to be “navigator addicted”, losing capacity to read and choose the path without being assisted by a computer device. This habit leads to a lacking tendency in free exploration. We are used to have someone or something which tells us where to go, therefore we are more and more subjected to someone else’s choices imposition.

Fig.18 Kate McLean`s project “Smelly Maps” that allow the user to navigatethe city using scent-based smelly maps


Problem Framing

Watch_Dogs WeAreData

It gather publicly available geolocated data in one location. Towns are recreated on a 3D map, allowing the user to discover the data that organises and runs modern cities today.


Chatty Maps



Real - time


Urban life


Cultural life



Case studies



Urban infrastructures Social media

It is an urban sound dictionary Sounds who capture sounds and study Emotions the relationship between sound- Perceptions scapes, emotions and people’s perceptions to create a restorative experince. It maps places, events, subjects and themes related to the city. The museum’s collection is constantly growing thanks to the contributions of organizations, scholars, citizens and visitors.

Museums Historical buildings Public facility buildings Public spaces

MAAM - Ivrea

Industrial buildings It gathers the architecture of Olivetti which is situated in Ivrea Neighborhoods in an unique map.


A Tale of Many Cities

It maps the important places Places with idenwhich are considered to have tities an important identity for the city. Places can be suggested either by curators or visitors of the website. It is a journey inside the telecommunications network – a dataset that traces across the planet. Project aims at exploring the calls, SMS, data requests and data traffic within cities.

Spatial clusters Density Calls SMS Data request


2.9 Ivrea - Moscow, two proposal 2.9.1 Moscow as a cluster museum Moscow is nowadays a megalopolis full of changes and many new metamorphoses are ongoing. “It is a city infused with a desire for modernization which on the one hand wants to measure swords with the contemporary examples of the leading capitals of the world (as Paris, London, Berlin, Singapore), and on the other appears fated, if seen against a historical horizon beginning with the Nineteenth century, to yet again face the challenges of some fundamental phases in its urban vicissitude, which has always been intertwined with the major phases of the national history.”1 The centre of the city is characterized by a constellation of different museums and cultural institution, all separated and spread in the urban tissue. The actual proposal for the creation of a cluster museum arise from the Museum of Architecture. The A. V. Shchusev State Museum of Architecture is located in the heart of Moscow, near the Red Square and close to the Lenin library, within the historical Talyzin Mansion on the Vozdvizhenka. All of those cultural institution are closed one to each other but actually they don’t have any kind of connection among them. This museum is acting as an active part proposing the creation of a cluster museum including all the institution with cultural importance in a common network. The proposal of the A. V. Shchusev State Museum arise from a common need of a new concept of museum: “a museum understood as a space for study, research and enhancement of the architectural heritage, for dialogue with architecture and contemporary architectural thought, in order to reinforce the relationship between architecture and the society, to favour an understanding of the role architecture plays in the life of humans, in society and in the country.“2 The idea of cluster born in this context and is firstly referred to the architectural sphere. The trigger is not only the need of the museum to expand itself in order to show all the collection it has and to create an archive, but a more ample scenario including several buildings surrounding it and different cultural institution interconnected. In the future the Museum of Architecture will be a cultural hub which coordinates a whole network of specialized museums: the Mel‘nikov House, the Museum of the MarchI, the museum of the Donskoy monastery and others. The creation of such a spread museum system will redefine and requalify the city centre of Moscow. In fact a strategy to integrate the museum in the urban 1 A. De Magistris U. Zanetti. Moscow 2.0 The present of the near future. 2015 2 I.Korobina. The Museum of Architecture and the museum cluster of Moscow: realizations, projects and strategies. 2015 52

Problem Framing

environment is needed. The city centre is a context of extraordinary potential, which has not been fully exploited, “because there are several cultural venues of primary importance located close to one another, and the urban tissue as a whole consists of monuments from different epochs […]”. 3 Fundamental for the construction of the cluster museum are pedestrian routes, but nowadays the centre of Moscow is not sufficiently attractive for them; it belongs first and foremost to business and private transport. For this reason we can forecast a redesign of the traffic in the city centre and a new quality of urban life will born. “The creation of the Cluster will benefit everyone: the museums and the structures belonging to the cluster area, people who need a more human urban environment and, naturally, Moscow – and the whole country – which will obtain a unified area dedicated to cultural and aesthetic qualities.” 4 The proposal of the museum along these principles is already started in different levels and in several directions. An essential component for the creation of the identity of the cluster museum consists of a virtual version of the Museum of Architecture. The Shchusev Museum of Architecture is ready to become the starting point of the architectural itinerary of this cluster. Starting with architectural purposes, the cluster museum will also include Kremlin Museum, the Museum of Fine Arts, the Pushkin Museum etc. creating a new museum district for Moscow. The museum cluster is a synergic system: all the cultural institutions belonging to its sphere of influence will have greater opportunities to develop in this new context and attract new visitors. But for sure the main benefit will consist of the improvement of the quality of the environment in the central part of the city.

Fig.19 Imaginary Moscow - the Schusev State Architecture Museum did a visual campaign that imagines underground extensions of Moscow landmarks,creting a parallel cluster world

3 Ibid. 4 Ibid. 53

Ivrea - Moscow

2.9.2 Ivrea as a cluster museum Ivrea is a little city with a variegated urban tissue, and with different kind of heritage within it. Although it is of Celtic foundation, the Roman signs are evident even today in the city centre. From a naturalistic point of view, Ivrea is considered the capital of the Canavese a subalpine geographical and historical area of North-West of Italy. However its highly distinctive characteristic is its being “industrial city of the XX century” 5. From this point of view the city with its industrial heritage is candidate in the list of UNESCO world heritage. As an industrial city, was built between 1930 and 1960 by Adriano Olivetti. The city of twentieth century is mainly recognizable along the axis corso Jervis . This axis constitutes the barycentre of the nominated property. The area is characterized by many buildings with different function: manufacturing buildings, social service buildings and residential units. “The plurality of forms and architectural and urban cultures that are represented in the nominated property show how the architectural heritage of Ivrea represents a milestone in the identification of repertoires and solutions developed by the architectonic culture of the twentieth century to answer crucial questions posed by growth of cities and territories invested by the processes of industrialization”. 6

Fig.20 View on Corso Jevis, the main axis in the Olivetti industrial part of Ivrea

The area is thus characterized by homogeneity dictated by the period of construction and the intended use: the overall design of the industrial city of Olivetti has led to the emergence of a cluster of production and daily life. The project was characterized by the attention not only for the production, but also for daily life of workers and their family. Social centers and services such as schools and kindergartens were designed together with the production plants. The complex was fully active until late nineties, and then was gradually abandoned. The inscription of the site to the UNESCO nomination provides a renewal and a new future for the site: “The inscription of the candidate site to the World Heritage List can help to attract new companies and businesses on the site in line with the themes of the nomination and the values of a industrial culture that points on creativity and technological innovation of the process, of the product and cultural one that considers the values of the area as essential elements of a type of promotion marked by economic, social and environmental sustainability. With appropriate communication strategies and presentation of the twentieth century industrial city site, built in partnership with the properties, the goods could accommodate, in the XXI century, private service activities for acceleration, incubation and development of innovative start-ups changing from the factory of innovative products in the factory of innovative companies.” 7

Fig.21 Masterplan of the industrial buildings of the Ovlivetti factory

5 Dossier di candidatura UNESCO, May 2016 6 Piano di gestione, UNESCO May 2016 7 Piano di gestione, UNESCO May 2016


Problem Framing

This future factory of innovative companies will lead to a complete renovation and reuse of the historical building. This project, in line with the industrial heritage protection will preserve the historical building creating a new kind of open air museum. This process has already started in 2001 with a few intervention in the industrial heritage: the Maam-Ivrea, an open air museum with different tourist paths and cultural initiatives and a university campus. Unfortunately those two action were not followed by others and consequently the intervention wasn’t so powerful. The open air museum remained an attraction just for few tourists, for architects or industrial production addected. We can interpret Ivrea with its industrial heritage as an already potential cluster museum, diffused along the streets and surrounding areas. As many example of cluster museum, a smart intervention on the public space with a parallel construction of an interconnected web platform will create the identity of the Industrial city as a cluster museum. Ivrea, the industrial city, born as a cluster of everyday life, planned in its complexity, will be in the future a cluster museum, centre of culture and incubator of technologies.

IVREA VS MOSCOW mid-sized town


urban megalopolis

variegated urban tissue


ongoing urban vicissitude

in process of UNESCO recognition


already recognized cultural importance

industrial heritage


various cultural ensemble

predominantly linear


diffused system

activating public space;


redifine and requalify the city center

cluster as a part of everyday life

Table 7. Comparative table of Ivrea vs Moscow


Ivrea - Moscow

2.10 Why Ivrea? At the Archivio Storico Olivetti, historical archive in Ivrea, Antonio Perazzo described Ivrea as “a little city that, with Olivetti, became a pulsing center of industrial activity ... and now it’s returned to being a little provincial city”. The issue that is questioned here is what this small provincial city has to offer and be suitable to develop the project? During the 20th century, tendency in national and international urban practices was different. Ivrea is an unique example because it was rather than “created” as an industrial city, “completed” as an industrial city, thanks to the transforming period of 30 years, when numerous facilities were built as complimentary functions to the factory. It is not built from zero, but carefully thought and planned to upgrade the existing city. It is not utopian, but real life example how to successfully deal with the social and urban issues. The importance of Ivrea is based on the fact that not only specific architectural buildings were important, but the whole urban tissue was generated to reflect certain visionary ideas of Adriano Olivetti. “The street, the factory, the house are the most substantial and visible elements of a civilization in evolution,” Olivetti argued in his book Citta dell’Uomo (City of Man). In the period of major expansion of industry, ideas of industrial decentralization in the city of Ivrea resulted in industrial landscape, made up of particular and high quality factory, service and residential buildings carefully set within land and urban planning schemes. Industrial policy implementation in Ivrea is based on a social and productive system inspired by the community itself. The city was created as a manifesto of policies of communities movement. Olivetti’s urban development was supposed to be “on a human scale”, with the goal being “harmony between private life and public life, between work and the home, between centers of consumption and centers of production”1. The whole assemble of buildings and spaces are important to perceive it as a cluster where elements are connected by the ideas embedded in them. What we consider heritage in Ivrea, besides authenticity that remained thanks to conserved architectural characteristics and uses of buildings, are also intangible elements, such as memory of visionary ideas of Olivetti. (In the city still live people that remember and can witness the prosperity that characterized Ivrea in the middle of 20th century.) Idea of Olivetti was to a make a city that affirms the concept of using technology in a human way, in service of a man, to combine and harmonize the man and the machine. Having discussed before the concepts of heritage and cluster museums, and applied to the case of Ivrea, what we want to do is to reinterpret everything that is considered heritage (buildings, public spaces, memories…) through digital technologies in order to create a space with characteristics of a cluster museum. Digital technologies in this case are the unit of unification because they contribute in defining this heritage. In a way it is a contemporary interpretation of the vision of Olivetti, using technology to serve people, with social consciousness and meaning. 1 A.Olivetti - edited by A.Saibene. Città dell`uomo. 2015 56

Problem Framing

2.10.1 Ivrea SWOT Analysis

_ unique and atypical model of industrial city in Italy and Europe _ series of well preserved examples _ manifesto of policies of communities movement _ conserved authentical architectural characteristics and uses of buildings

_ lost former identity - now perceived as “little provincial city� _ neglected pubic spaces _ lack of maintainance _ lack of resources

S W O T _ sufficiently small area - possible to control the outcome _ on UNESCO waiting list - possible collaboration _ possible support from instiutions _ availabilty of materials from different sources _ curiosity about history of Olivetti _ consciousness of visionary history of Ivrea _ attraction for tourists _ visibility and recognizability of the city

_limited funding _ too strong interventions or overuse of innovative technology could cause contra effect and not convey the real intention of the project _ lack of adequate infrastructure for support

Table 8. Ivrea swot analysis




Problem Solving The methodology adopted to solve the question of digital and interactive spaces for museum clusters starts with the understanding and a complete analysis of stakeholders identification, stakeholders grouping, value identification and value gap analysis. Later on the proposal divide itself into two steps with the goal of dealing with two dimensions, which are virtual and physical. The first step is a realization of a Map, which is constructed only in the virtual dimension, where any kind of data and information are presented and stocked. The Map provides a virtual interaction with the users and it acts as a decision-making and recording tool for the following step. The second step is an urban intervention, which is constructed in the physical dimension, which provides multi-sensorial interaction with the users. We call these interventions as the new urban monuments. These two proposals that are developed in two different spaces are strongly connected to each other and they are the second and third element, which closes the chain after the theoretical background. Our solution to the problem lives in two extreme words where one cannot survive without the other.


3.1 Stakeholders Identification Name Municipality of Ivrea

city administration

Piedmont Region

region administration


preservation of World heritage, safeguarding and emergency/technical assistance, management planning, professional training, public and youth education

MIBACT (Ministry for cultural heritage and environment)

managing cultural heritage and environment in order to ensure the protection of important sites in Italy

Associazione Spille d’Oro Olivetti

gathering and representing former employees of the Olivetti Group, who have completed more than 25 years in the company, and want to share and distribute values they have acquired there

Associazione Archivio Storico Olivetti

collecting, reordering, preservation, study and promotion of the vast archive records relating to the history of the company and of the personalities of the Family Olivetti

Archivio Nazionale Del Cinema D’Impresa

conservation, enhancement and dissemination of the audiovisual heritage produced by Italian companies

Fondazione Natale Capellaro and Laboratorio-Museo Tecnologic@amente Ecomuseo dell’anfiteatro Morenico di Ivrea (AMI)

Museo Civico Garda

Museo della Carale

retelling italian industrial history, highlighting the Olivetti’s productions and culture in order to stimulate imagining the future, but through discovering history and roots promoting the recovery and valorization of traditional culture of Anfiteatro Morenico di Ivrea representing archaeological and collections of Oriental art exposing works from different artists and also private collections, always in a dynamic way and in constant update, in order to deepen relations between Word and image, based on contemporary research of history

MAAM Ivrea (Museo a cielo aperto dell’ architettura moderna di Ivrea)

cataloguing of buildings for the protection and preservation in Ivrea; collecting information and graphic documentation; manage fruition, dissemination and promotion services such as guided tours, publishing guides, website

Fondazione Adriano Olivetti

promoting, developing and coordinating initiatives and cultural activities, which are directed to achieve the welfare and the education of citizens, in harmony with the principles of the Constitution, and according to the ideas of Adriano Olivetti

FAI (Fondo Ambiente Italiano) Fondazione Guelpa Gruppo Torinese Trasporti Ferrovie dello Stato Bike Box Olivetti (part of Telecom Italia) Telecom Italia TIM Foundation Ivrea citizens owners of Olivetti’s heritage buildings tourists tourist operators 60


protecting and enhancing the heritage of Italian art and nature, educating the public, supervising and intervening on the territory supporting initiatives in the areas of culture, unleashing the artistic heritage left by Mrs. Guelpa to the city of Ivrea manage public transport in Turin and area manage railway transport in Italy manage bicycle-sharing project in Ivrea supporting Small and Medium Enterprises, Large businesses and Public Institutions in digital evolution by adopting innovative solutions and services developing new generation infrastructures to ensure coverage with fixed ultra-broadband network and mobile network promoting a vision of innovation and technology as social enablers, supporting projects in the fields of digital education and cultural innovation living and working in the city administrating/managing heritage buildings visiting the city organizing activities for tourists

Interest Power

Problem Solving, The Project

What is important for them?

How can they contribute?

How can they block the project?

development of Ivrea

laws/policies, financial support

not approve

development of the region

laws/policies, financial support

not approve

protect World heritage

create guidelines for the protection, accept Ivrea as UNESCO site

make too restrictive policies

protect Italian heritage

create guidelines for the protection, promote Ivrea, financial support

preservation and promotion of the Olivetti heritage

organize recreational, leisure, cultural and solidarity activities in accordance with the project

preservation and promotion of the Olivetti heritage

give access to the collection, organize cultural activities for promotion

deny access to the collection

promote the diffusion of enterprise films knowledge give access to the collection, organize cultural activities for promotion

deny access to the collection

preservation and promotion of the Olivetti heritage

primarily destined to schools, teach about Italian industrial and mechanical history to stimulate creativity and experimentation desire, promote the project

enhancing cultural value of the territory

organize activities referred to institutions, promote the project

promotion of their collection

contribute in the study of heritage, promote the project

promotion of their collection

contribute in the study of heritage, promote the project

promote knowledge of modern architecture of Ivrea

enable collaboration with experts from their staff, share material, promote the project

preservation and promotion of the Olivetti heritage

mobilizing the civil, social, and political engagement, organize activities to promote the project, economical support

promotion of respect for Italy’s tangible and intangible heritage

make too restrictive policies, not allow interventions

protect the heritage, organize educational activities for the collectivity, supervise intervetions of the territory

promoting their collection

give access to the collection, organize supporting activities

enable quality of transport network

promote the project, logistic support, special offers for coming to Ivrea

enable quality of transport network

promote the project, logistic support, special offers for coming to Ivrea

enable citizens easier and sustainable transport

create special offers that allow using of their infrastructure and experiencing the project, promote the project

developing innovative solutions, economical gain

technological support, economical support

developing innovative solutions, economical gain

technological support, economical support

economical gain, recognition in the society

economical support, promote the project

quality of life, suitable places for their activities

use new features in the city, interact

not adopt new features in the city

practical use and economic exploitation of their properties enjoy places for leisure, knowledge and instruction

maintain their properties, build a dialogue with the institutions and participate in the project

refuse to give properties on disposal

engage more customers in organized activities

promote the project and give more information during activities

visit places, use the proposed features not presenting in a correct way 61


3.1.1 Stakeholders Categorization Having identified and analyzed stakeholders that can be involved in the project, they were categorized in groups based on their resources and values.

Logistic supporters

Economical supporters Local community tourist operators


Ivrea citizens owners of heritage buildings

Cultural supporters

Policy makers

Table10. Stakeholders categorization 62

Problem Solving, The Project

3.1.2 Identifying Values Cultural supporters are institutions, cultural organizations and museums that are involved in the project because they share the same values that the project is affirming. Resource they have is knowledge, and level of involment depends on their interest and power. They can contribute by engaging their staff, putting on disposal their collections and promoting the project. Activities they conduct are complementary with the project and can support it, so making partnerships with these institutions is important part of the strategy. Economical supporters are institutions, organizations or companies that invest money in the project in order to have benefit in the future. When invest money, they expect to have some economical gain (direct or indirect), useful information for processing, recognition and status in society and prosperity of the city in general. Policy makers can influence the project by deciding about policies and regulations that can affect it (in a positive or negative way). It is important to establish the dialogue with these institutions in order to have the correct legal framework for the project. This group of stakeholders also has the power to block the project, so they should be managed carefully. Logistic supporters are important to collaborate with because the practical organization and management of the project can depend on that collaboration. Quality of user’s experience can also depend on quality of developed technological systems. Local community (citizens, owners of Olivetti buildings) is the most affected and can have a lot of benefit if the project is well accepted and developed. Tourists are short term visitors of Ivrea who expect interesting and entertaining experience and may be the main group of users of the project.

Table11. Importance of values per stakeholder 63


3.1.3 Values Gap Analysis Based on the categorization of stakeholders, analysis of values of different groups has been done, and some gaps in values can be noticed. The diagrams indicate problems that could emerge because of these critical gaps, so they should be taken into account in the decion-making processes.

Table12. Values gap analysis 1

The gaps that emerge in the first focus are between values of policy makers, cultural and economical supporters. Filling the gap in this situation would be in finding the right balance in investments: satisfying needs of cultural supporters by ensuring that the project is representative, unique, recognizable and innovative in a creative way, in order to attract attention and convey the main message, while having in mind the practical needs - feasibility and sustainability. This gap should be filled by considering budget limits and existing policies - adapt the project features and decide the priorities, find the right balance between wishes and possibilities. These gaps are important to consider because they influence on experience of end users - it can be limited by economical and administrative factors.

Table13. Values gap analysis 2

The gaps in second focus emerged by comparing the local community, tourists and policy makers. When considering sustainability, innovation and economic gain, for local community are quite important, as well as for policy makers, while these values do not concern tourists so much. Managing the project in the right way is important in order to satisfy and create interaction between locals and tourists, and also encourage changes in attitude and behaviour. 64

Problem Solving, The Project


3.1.4 Stakeholders Management

keep satisfied


manage closely

keep informed

interest Table14. Stakeholders management

Based on the evaluation of interest and power of stakeholders, different strategies should be developed for managing them. As it can be seen on the diagram, the most important stakeholders for the project are the ones who have high interest for the project, but also high power. They are categorized as promoters and should be managed closely. In this case, main promoters of the project are Fondazione Adriano Olivetti, that can be partial sponsor, and also cultural supporter. MAAM Ivrea has already started projects in Ivrea regarding cultural heritage, so collaboration with them can be very important. High importance also have the owners of Olivetti historical buildings, because having good communication with them can facilitate administrative issues. On the other side, both interest and power of some stakeholders are evaluated as low, so they are cathegorized as apathetics. In this case they should only be monitored, so that eventually they can be included in the project more. Stakeholders with high power but lower interests are latents (some policy makers), and should be kept satisfied, while the ones with high interest but low power are defenders and should be kept informed.



Problem Solving 3. 2 The map project

3.2.1 Mapping the Heritage Why a Map ? The map has the equivalent power of letters. When you have an idea in your mind the first step to forecast it is to write. The map allows us to put all sort of information in one box, conserve and continuously update its contents. Heritage Data

From Physical to Virtual

From Virtual to Physical

Mapping Data

Map Project

Materialize Data

The map is a tool which has the merit to keep together all the pieces of the cluster’s puzzle, made of various elements of different nature which concur in the heritage of the city, even if it is continuously changing. Its use can be various and personal, as discovery tool or navigator in the space, even the daily public space, which can be explored in new ways, in a sort of epiphany. Mapping the heritage is a double useful operation. First of all it represents the main step shifting from digital contents to physical layout, placing them in their proper position in the space, and viceversa, linking places to the data set of information in the virtual dimension. In other words it makes the digital contents architecture less concealed, more understandable. In addition, any interaction recorded between users, contents and places could be a very important tool: a sort of document which testify behaviors, opinions, thoughts. This kind of material are fundamentally (digital) data. The (blurring) boundaries of heritage

Urban Project

Fig.22 Map - from physical to virtual

Fig.23 Blurring boundries in a map Initial Boundries


As previously described, even the value of heritage is not fixed, but it changes in time. The paradigm of next generations is not predictable to us. In the same way this paradigm can be very personal so that documents could have different gradients of importance for each person, according to their cultural background, history, personal interests and attitudes. If everyone (any stakeholder) were required to trace the boundary of a cluster area, according to his/her opinion, we would probably have as many different versions as the number of visitors. In the case of Ivrea, for instance, the idea that the importance of the city is mainly related to its industrial past could be surprisingly renegotiated with unexpected answers from the users, both insiders and outsiders. But how to consider this blurring boundaries regarding the identity of the cluster? Must they be considered as a value of richness, open to a variety of different possible readings, or just a loss of identity clearness? An excessive freedom of choice makes hard the definition of the cluster. On the other hand, if a selection of elements were “top-down” provided and marked as “heritage”, the idea of enabling future generations to identify heritage according to their values paradigm would be contradicted, their right would be denied. Bounding Data

Updated Boundries

Problem Solving, The Project

3.2.2 Collectiong Data From Cultura materiale to Big data Talking about heritage in terms of conservation problem, a great role is played by the idea of “cultura materiale”. It refers to the idea that monuments and main important buildings, strongly representing particular events or periods of our past, are not the only “storytellers”. History is also narrated by a set of different minor voices: a narrative based on traces of daily life during ages, which is fundamental to piece together the real past life condition, culture and tradition about territories. In other words, we could say that two approaches contribute to write the same history: the “top-down” of big monuments and the “bottom-up” of cultura materiale. This important issue is inlaid in a broader discussion frame. How do we select what is worth to be handed down to posterity and what is not? Do we have the right to deprive to the future generation what we discard and the possibility for them to choose according to the future paradigm of values? Values and heritage paradigm change through ages, indeed, what we judge important now maybe it was not in the past, or even in the present in other countries and cultures of the world. In addition, some objects belonging to the recent past can be very vulnerable from many point of view: its younger life makes its value inconsistent compared to other “monument-document”; secondly, in some case the normative system does not provide the necessary conditions for their proper tutelage, not recognizing then as “cultural heritage”. It has been always hard to recognize the value of a particular monument/building/movement/idea, and it is even harder to be aware of the value of something belonging to the present. This comes particularly true if related to cultura materiale. In the age of internet society, in which we live, even if we do not realize it, we are black by data. Every action is recorded in the digital archives by many different sources for many different purposes. Our entire set of cultures and daily life is translated in digital language: we could say that “big data” are the current and future cultura materiale! This is a new different way to look at them, not only as source of profit for companies extrapolating useful information on marketing, but also as a common resource to build, redefine and update what we call heritage.

Strong and Weak documents Another important feature about documents is the power they could have to affect and possibly improve policies and rules in the current society. Among the scenario of philosophic studies in the field, the philosopher Maurizio Ferraris1 proposes a distinction between weak and strong documents according to this capability. He defines “weak” all the elements the only function is to remember/represent a picture of the past, food for the collective memory; 1 Maurizio Ferraris, Documentalità - perche è necessatio lasciar trace, 2009 69

Collecting Data

“strong” are documents which are able to produce actions projected in the future, a form of contract for instance, or in general documents which are not only descriptive but also prescriptive. The transformation of a weak document in a strong one is the fundamental step any project is aimed to. In heritage conservation field, this concept of document’s power could be a really important push in terms of improving policies and laws whose aspects are lacking of effectiveness.

Weak Documents Historical Photo (amatorial, official) Video (amatorial, official) Unrealised projects Documents (bibliography, survey, advertisement, letters, postcards, paintings…)

Present Photo Video Social network posts Documents (bibliography, survey, advertisement, mail, postcards, paintings, blog…) Masterplan and project proposals

Strong Documents Piano Regolatore di Ivrea Restrictions for industrual heritage Candidate dossier for UNESCO Approved projects and surveys


Which document defines the initial boundry ?

Which document updates the boundary ?

Strong documents - Piano Regolatore di Ivrea 2000, Carta della qualità – confine della città storica moderna- ( land use, regulations for industrial heritage ) - Unesco nominated property and buffer zone - UNESCO Survey

Weak and strong documents

Problem Solving, The Project

Unesco nominated property and buffer zone

Piano Regolatore di Ivrea 2000 Carta della qualitĂ 

Unesco survey

Intersection of Strong Documents and buffer zone

Fig.24 Week and strong documents in the map of Ivrea 71

Collecting Data

How to draw a Map? The following step is, consequently, the problem of how to define a mapping method suitable to the task: how to design a cluster museum’s map and make the updating process possible. Since the space to map has no fixed boundary and elements, as previously said, a user’s experience centered design seems to be the strategy to focus on. In the past, a significant mapping attempt, based on city user’s experience, was produced by Kevin Lynch. Through an empirical method, based on direct interviews with the locals of three case study cities, he designed maps describing the urban space and structure as perceived by who daily lives it.2 Despite the interesting result, innovative at the time, this method is nowadays inefficient to pursuit the task. On one hand, we have the advantage to access to more data and information about city user’s experience, thanks to digital tools and social media; on the other hand, the constant need for surveys would represent a limit for a method which yearns for being automatically incremental in the updating process. However, not everything is obsolete in Lynch’s empirical method. At the root of the study there is a solid categorization of elements which defines the grid for the base structure of the map space, to which all the single interview descriptions were leaded back. For this reason, the construction of the case study cluster’s map has firstly required a clear definition of a grid of contents. In short, a classification of what we have, the ingredients for a cluster museum.

The ingredients for a Map (the model) The map needs a cartographic base on which is overlying a multiple layers organization. The cartographic base is made by essential information on urban morphology, such as buildings, roads, railway, green public areas and natural elements of the landscape like river, forests, fields. Additional layers with official or unofficial information, related to the industrial heritage of the city, are superimposed to this background. Firstly, main important buildings and places are highlighted. By operating this selection, a measurable definition of criteria is needed to identify what is heritage. For each topographic layer of provenience, objects are ontologically selected by attributes, so as to result by intersecting these features. The attributes end to outline the consistency of heritage’s perimeter. Digitalized material (links to documents as photos, videos, abstracts), belonging to official cultural institutions or archives, is then located on the map as punctual elements. This layer of “digital memories” is implemented with various types of VGI3 material, by unofficial sources, with the possibility to be spontaneously uploaded by users, in line with the functioning dynamics of Virtual Museums, applied with a model similar to OpenStreetMap4 concept. 2 The results were published in the book: The image of the city, Kevin Lynch,1960. 3 Volunteered Geographic Information. 4 72

Problem Solving, The Project

Landscape Select by proximity: hilly areas in environmental value, farmland for building preservation, urban public parks.

Buildings Select by function: industrial, residential, public service.

Cluster Resulting by overlapping of all layers’ selections

Streets and Public spaces

Select by proximity and connection to objects selected from other layers.

Urban disposition Select by description: modern period neighborhood, modern polifunctional district.

Fig.25 Ingredients of the map 73

Collecting Data

Another category of intangible information is introduced, relatively new to the map paradigm (for instance,Watchdogs 5 ) and completely new to any mapping operation of cultural heritage: the social media information.

Topic Clustering

Coarse Filtering


Sort by Day Time


Fig.26 Analyzing tweets 74

The map is, indeed, implemented with punctual elements made by georeferenced public posts by Twitter, Instagram, Flicker, Facebook. This material has with no doubt the limit to be an unofficial source and to be relatively hard to control, but on the other hand, it opens a completely new freedom of readings and interpretations. The “knowledge” provided (if that is possible to define it) is generally made by fresh and actual critical positions, related to topics which people are sensitive to. In addition, the possibility for users to interact through existing tools they already know and are daily used to, to increases the ease of use in participating to public social debates. Once this kind of big data are collected, the most critical issue is the filtration of contents which indeed enhance the definition of heritage. The social networks involved in the model work with very different logic, thus each of them would need a separate detailed study. As illustrative example the case of Twitter is briefly analyzed. The first, perhaps unsophisticated, information analysis is allowed by the presence of hashtags # to tag a particular content. But additional information are provided by the user ID regarding the chronology of its activity, the attitudes or interests. Then, the same semantic analysis is applied to the tweets’ string, whose analogies are fundamentally edges between the network’s nodes, linking them in different ways , open to a wide range of possible readings. The analysis of tweets’ content is aimed, in a first period, to find particular keywords or topics to extrapolate. A sample group of tweets within a period of 7 days in the area of Ivrea has been collected and analyzed, undergoing the tweets to sentiment analysis, topic extraction and topic clustering through a software6. The dataset shows three problems: firstly the rarefaction of data, since the number of tweets collected (around 300) is restrained the distribution appears too much dilute; secondly the presence of contents ascribable to a specific topic such as industrial heritage is hard to measure, since the cluster is not established yet on the territory; last, the period of time considered has revealed to be relatively short and too much influenced by few events of global resonance (for example soccer or the new album of a singer). For this reason a model of tweets classification has been imagined considering the possible impact on the local community of a new condition. The same tweet is expected to contain often more than one topic, thus the first elaboration is the topic classification, which provide also a ranking. In this way a set of tweets can be classified for importance because they are treating recurring topics. In this phase a coarse selection can be applied. The results show, for instance, a relevant ranking position for name of locations, towns in the area. These selected tweets acquire the priority in the visualization on the map. However, the possibility to 5 6 Meaning Cloud, a semantic analysis API product.

Problem Solving, The Project

show all the data without any filtering action allow a more realistic and free overview on the virtual society world. In addition, a sequence of other classifications are operated according to the timing of day, the polarity (positive, negative) and the agreement, when possible, otherwise a neutral value is assigned. In the light of the data analyzed and the restrained amount of elements, a wider period of time, over 2 moths, needs to be considered for the construction of the first “social media” layers’ package. A conceptual visualization mode is made by punctual elements. Once selected one, the content appears and the links between other elements with same semantic field of content are shown, revealing a virtual network layout, overlaying on the topographic morphology of the city. The analysis can also highlight differences in city’s social activity during different time of the day, displaying the most alive places and the quiet ones. Other additional layers are made by temporary current events in the surroundings or debates on important city or heritage issues, Forsquare announcements, public transport information and bike-sharing, which constitute a map service for the mobility. Below, a list of georeferenced layers, classified by type (surface, line, point) and a brief descriptive table. Surface Layer Layer 1 - Buildings Layer 2 - Streets Layer 3 - River Layer 4 - Green spaces Layer 5 – Industrial heritage cluster Line Layer Layer 6 - Transportation (Train, bus, bike path) Layer 7 - Link among contents

Point Layer Layer 8 - Transportation point (bike sharing, bus stop) Layer 9 - Instagram Layer 10 - Twitter Layer 11 - Flicker Layer 12 - Foursquare Layer 13 - Events Layer 14 - Physical monument Layer 15 - Digital Memory Layer 16 - Emerging issues

The presence of such a big amount of information, with various nature and utilization, can turn to be confusing, but some of these layers are strictly related, so that the visualization at the same time is required. For this reason the layers have been grouped in six packages: excepted for the cartographic base, the others can be turned on/off by the user, choosing the preferred visualization mode. Combinations of Layers Cartographic Base Layer 1,2,3,4

Urban life Layer 12,13, 14, 16

Industrial cluster Layer 5

Urban mobility Layer 6,8

Memories Layer 14, 15

Social media Layer 9,10,11,7

Table 15. Layers of the map 75

Collecting Data

Table 16. Layers Data Layer






Bibliography, photo, video

Official institutions

Database of official institutions


Through the interogation of the object access to the content is provided.

Municipality of Ivrea

Topographic database


The cartographic base of the map

Municipality of Ivrea, Map database GTT,Ferrovie Dello Stato, Bike Box


The path and real-time info of public transportation


Connections between other layer’s elements based on overlaping #




Public transportation path







Public transportation stops

Municipality of Ivrea, Map database GTT,Ferrovie Dello


The stops and real-time info of public transportation

9, 10, 11, 12

Post from social network platforms

Instagram, Twitter, Flicker, Foursquare

Map database

1 month

Real-time post from social network selected by positions and #


Manifesto of events

Official institutions, Map database municipality, private interests, users

Duration of event

Information and advertisement about on-going events based on location


Real –time position, sound, image inputs

Us and users

Map database

Real -time

Inputs recorded and provided by mobile monuments which is constantly moving through urban space


Bibliography, photo, video, Post from social network platforms

Users, Instagram, Twitter, Flicker,

Map database


Some of the significant post and information provided by user are selected and stored in a separate and permanent layer (this layer defines the boundries, the mobile monuments follow the chaning density of these elements.


Project proposals, survey, blog

Official institutions, municipality, private interests, users

Map database Web

Duration of the proposal

Point about of dicsussion about the future and present issues of the city in general.


Stato, Bike Box

Problem Solving, The Project

How to record? The user is, in this way, free to behave in active or passive way, without being forced to upload any content or to publish any post on social media or to participate in any discussion. But how to eventually trace his/her (path, choices, interest) in order to gradually enrich and update the map and make it an incremental system? The use of the map can be addressed in different ways, from expert to daily city users. The first action is to trace the position along the covered itinerary by demanding, for the use of the map, to turn on GPS on the personal smartphone. The recordings of multiple paths chosen by the users, who are free to move in the urban public space without any imposed itinerary, will draw the concealed structure of the cluster museum as perceived by people. Another type of data analysis can be extrapolated by the amount of “clicking” actions made by user on the elements of the map. This vouch for the general interests in certain contents than in others. On-site digital installations, strategically placed, can also record user’s interaction and behavior in the public space. These tools should be able to move along the city streets and squares, following the tendency of public attention, so they can be defined Mobile Monuments.

Analyzing data – Multicriteria analysis The consequent issue is, then: how to identify specific places, particular nodes in the map with relevance, both in terms of tangible and intangible consistency, for the cluster? The several types of data which are contained, displayed and recorded through the map need then to be analyzed in order to increment, step by step, the borders and conformation of the Cluster Museum. A simple look at the map is not enough to extrapolate univocal results, merging the multiple voices which are telling their story at the same time. For this reason a Multicriteria Analysis is demanded. Objectives and tasks, even at civic and social level, demanded to the Cluster Museum, are listed and weighted by a previous evaluation, based on case studies’ analysis. Then a mark is assigned to each category of elements present is the map, according to which degree it contribute or enhance a particular objective. In this way not all the elements on the map have the same importance and their different weight, multiplied by the density in their distribution, highlights few centralities, important for industrial heritage, in the urban layout.


Collecting Data



CLASS OF ELEMENTS Buildings Places


Social Media



Enhance the







+ among citi-zens

Induce civic dialogue







Future oriented







Turn museum into a







Turn user







Power to regenerate


















+ (industrial) history

+ knowledge

+ daily expe-rience + into curator + public space +

Act as guardian of (industrial) city treasures







∑ Weight (Class) / ∑ Weight

Table 17. Multicriteria analysis

These weighted value, assigned to each class of map’s elements, define the evaluation of nodes in a network. The high is the mark related to a particular area, the more importance it represents.


Problem Solving, The Project

Added value Several attempts in applying big data analysis have been made in urbanism field of study, but unlike the marketing application, they have not leaded to significant outcomes. No application have been made for the cultural heritage management field. The fundamental added value, proposed with the illustrated model, consists in the su-perimposition of the intangible and “weak”1 documents from social networks on a more traditional, even if automatic, mapping operation. The outcome wants to be a method to constantly verify and, perhaps, forecast the harmony or the shifting direction between what is officially defined heritage and what our current para-digm really assume as worthy of this definition.

Fig.27 Strong and weak documents added value

1 Maurizio Ferraris, Documentalità - Perchè è necessario lasciar trace, 2009, Laterza editore 79


twitter instagram memories

3.2.3 Interface One content, two outputs The output of our map has two faces depending on the use. It can be used both from computer as a platform or from mobile phone as an application. The usage from computer is festinated to a more complex use and it offers much structured options considering that can be used as a decision making tool. While the usage from mobile phone works as an application that can be used in daily life to explore and interact with the physical space. Map from Computer

User Policy makers Researchers Citizens Students Institutions


Decision-making tool Research tool Consulting tool Archive


Advance search mode Dosage of layers Complex filtering possibility

memoMapp Layers Heritage Database






Switch to intangible map social media, digital memories.

Fig.28 Web interface 82

Problem Solving, The Project

Map from Mobile phone





User Turist Citizen Worker





< > +

Via Jervis, 26

L. Figini, G. Pollini 1955

centro culturale, biblioteca, infermeria, centro colonie.

Information source Entertainment tool Interaction tool Advertisement tool Localisation


Quick search mode Easy interface Simplified layers Navigator option Interaction with pyhsical space

memory | 1957

@Fond_A_Olivetti Quando #Olivetti sognava il #sud come il #nord, #Matera come #Ivrea, oggi @ Matera2019 e @IvreaUnesco #radicicomuni

Fig.29 Smartphone interface 83



Problem Solving 3. 3 Urban Intervention

3.3.1 A grid of spatial experiences between digital and physical The urban intervention consists of 7 urban intervention typologies, to be disposed on the ideal grid that surround the cluster museum. Since the analysis recognized a shifting boundary to the idea of cluster museum, the intervention has been divided in several phases of construction. Every phase - and the first one in particular - will have a determining component of analyzing and registering the users interaction with the public space, in order to guide the successive phases towards a more correct definition of the cluster museum. The number of phases has intentionally not been decided yet, since there might be a potentially infinite number of phases that include the dismantling and recycling of previous phases that no longer represent the citizenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s will or conception of industrial heritage. With the advancement of technologies and the development of new ideas, there might also be new urban intervention typologies to add to - or substitute for - the original 7 installations that will populate the grid. The grid is a conceptual element of the project, but also a technical one: all the installations, indeed, are based on an hexagon module that can be divided in sub-modules of triangles and associated in macro-groups of bigger hexagons. This system makes all the interventions compatible and interchangeable with each other. Also the concrete paving, that constitutes the most simple urban intervention and serve as a support to all the seven installations, uses a metal interlocking system that can be secured to the ground and occasionally removed, if the installation is no longer necessary. The seven installation typologies are meant to bring closer the digital and the physical world. On one hand, their presence on the map show how important has become for our culture to explore the space through our digital devices and gives a prefiguration of what the space has to offer to the user. On the other hand, the installations are designed to emphasize the aspects of life that canâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t be enjoyed through the screen of a phone. Some of them focus on a particular sense, but they all provide a multi-sensory experience.


Problem Solving, The Urban intervention

Fig.30 Mapping of the 1st phase of intervention, based on the analysis of most recognized industrial heritage (Corso Jervis)

Fig.31 Mapping of the possible 2nd phase of intervention, in addition to the first one 87

Fig.32 Mapping of the possible 3rd phase of intervention

Fig.33 Mapping of the possible 4th phase of intervention 88

Problem Solving, The Urban intervention

3.3.2 Multisensorial installations In our project, we tried to a establish a stable connection between digital and physical experiences, involving all the senses. The choice of material was essential in defining the different feelings of the urban experience. In order to address touch, for example, we tried to differentiate the paving materials according to the different use of the space, choosing a warm material like wood for sitting areas, metal surfaces for playful activities, concrete tiles for walking, water ponds for relaxing areas, etc. The grid foresees a high percentage of green spaces, where users can touch the grass barefoot or experience the smell of botanical species, already present in the detailed landscape project of the Olivetti development. Materials were useful also to stimulate the sense of hearing: for example we designed aluminum surfaces and small metal plates to walk on, in order to recreate a similar sound to the work atmosphere of Olivetti factories. These physical installations, that can be occasionally transported to other points of the map, are strictly connected with the map database, where recordings of these sounds can be stored and compared to the archive recordings. So users can decide to listen to a preview of these sounds or to go directly to the site and produce the sound themselves. It could be an interesting urban experiment to record some spots of the public space during determined spans of time and simultaneously upload it to the map. Not only this might give an impression of the place and trigger visitors to try directly this urban experience, but it also becomes a precious urban document. Thus the sound is used in an active and passive way, as well as with a digital and analogical technology: the metal surfaces can produce sounds with the steps of people, but also reproduce music and recordings related to the place, like the sound of typewriters or the factory noises. Another interesting application would involve the concept of urban displacement: the flow of cars could be associated with the reproduction of live recordings of the Dora Baltea river, especially in the area that was once affected by the river flooding, and stimulate in the user a completely different experience of walking on the sidewalk and looking at traffic. In order to control the traffic flow and make drivers recognize the respect area of the cluster museum, it has been proposed a new kind of paving that include geometrical optical nudges, with the same geometry and concept of the grid. Also touch has been interpreted both as digital and physical: users need the use of a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;touch-screenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; in order to activate the map system, to locate the documents about the heritage and to play with the installations, but they can also interact with the public space through touching the surface of specific materials, which thanks to sensors can directly react or stimulate reactions of other urban furniture. For example, we designed scenarios in which users can change the color and configuration of urban lighting just by sitting on benches or walking on the tempered glass pixels that animate the grid. Another scenario could be the activation of vocal and video information by slightly touching architectural elements. The main inspiration for this kind of kinetic interaction with the urban grid came from the LIFT BIT project by Carlo Ratti and MIT Senseable City Lab, a sofa that can change its configuration through the use of an app and quickly respond to the user necessity. In the same way, we tried to develop a conceptual design of urban furniture that can respond to the citizensâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; necessities. 89

1. Peephole

A dynamic screen made of hexagonal metal diaphragms similar to those found in cameras, that recognize and follow the movement of humans. A second layer of digital screens hides behind this porous membrane, showing people a random selection of the information flow that the museum cluster is made of, like spying through the peephole of a virtual door. This new facade of electrical eyes can renew anonymous pieces of architecture that surround the industrial cluster. With a distinct mechanical sound, the installation perceives its surroundings and communicates them to the map, registering the number of people interacting with it and just passing by. From Virtual to Physical - Identifying the installation on the map; choosing which documents to show on the screens. From Physical to Virtual - Consulting a randomly generated series of documents, visible through a system of screen and diaphragms; activating the consultation device through movement - Searching more information about the documents shown thanks to a system of geometrical coordinates and QR codes - Automatically sending information to the app concerning the number of people interacting with the public space.


Fig.34 Peephole intervention

Problem Solving, The Urban intervention

2. Light Pixels

Urban lighting can be easily combined with the concrete paving, thanks to the modularity of the hexagon and its triangular submodules. These reinforced glass pieces can be combined into playful configuration of pixels and hexagonal screens, showing the documents related to that area of the cluster. If close to the beacon sensor technology, users can control these light pixels through the app in order to change their color, their configuration, their intensity and, finally, to select the heritage material to show. The ideal location for this kind of installation is in central areas of the cluster, where a lot of information is available and kids can learn by playing with the public space. From Virtual to Physical - Identifying the installation on the map; controlling lights color, intensity and configuration; choosing which image or video to show on the hexagonal screens. From Physical to Virtual - Consulting a randomly generated series of documents, visible through the hexagonal screen and light pixels; activating the consultation device through movement - Searching more information about the documents shown thanks to QR codes embedded in the pictures shown; automatically sending information to the app concerning the number of people interacting with the public space.

Fig.35 Light pixels intervention


3. Wood Piece

A technological seating unit that can be transformed by the user right before sitting on it. After clicking on it, different configurations will be shown on the app: the user can choose between a normal bench, a comfortable chaise longue, a table with seats, etc. When the area occupied by this intelligent bench is needed for a festival or a public event, the bench can eventually disappear in the ground, thank to its lifting technology. The triangular pieces of this element are designed with smooth angles and three different essences of wood, in order to increase the comfort and stimulate the feeling of smell and touch. The wood piece can be placed in green areas - for picnic for example - as well as in urban contexts, in front of the industrial heritage buildings. From Virtual to Physical - Identifying the installation on the map; controlling seating position - Choosing from several possible configuration. From Physical to Virtual - Activating the urban furniture through movement - Automatically sending information to the app concerning the number of people interacting with the specific installation.


Fig.36 Wood piece intervention

Problem Solving, The Urban intervention

4. Smart Pot

The concrete paving needs some green element to increase the pleasant feeling of walking in the city. This installation consists of concrete pots containing different botanical species, belonging to the Piedmont typical flora and the landscape project of Olivetti buildings. This choice is meant to stimulate the sense of smell and trigger curiosity in citizens about their own natural heritage. Indeed, the users of the map can get information about the different species of plants through the use of a QR code printed on the concrete surface of the pots. The smart pots can be located all around the public intervention, without taking too much space to the narrow sidewalks. When located in green areas, they are designed with a completely permeable bottom surface. From Virtual to Physical - Identifying the installation on the map; analyzing botanical species before and during the visit. From Physical to Virtual - Searching more information about the plants thanks to QR codes embedded in the vases - Automatically sending information to the app concerning the number of people interacting with the public space.

Fig.37 Smart pot intervention


5. Sound Platform

Metal paving elements that can record and produce sounds, both digitally and physically. This installation can be realized in two different versions: the first one consists of a multifaceted metal surface that stays at the same level of the concrete paving, emitting and recording digital sounds; the second version has to be located at a lower level than the concrete paving, as a sort of pot for smaller metal elements that emit a sound when people walk in. This evocative sound, similar to more dramatic installation â&#x20AC;&#x153;Falling leavesâ&#x20AC;? designed by Menashe Kadishman in Berlin Jewish Museum, should remind people of the mechanical work in the nearby factories and stimulate their hearing sense. As it concerns the first digital version of this sound installation, it would be interesting to record the sound of some spots of the city - for example the flow of cars, the shout of children going out from school, the singing of birds, etc - and uploading it directly to the map, as part of the heritage documents that can be consulted before and during the visit of the space. From Virtual to Physical - Identifying the installation on the map - Choosing which audio document or music to listen to - Listening to the public space sounds even without being there. From Physical to Virtual - Activating the consultation device through movement - Searching more information about the audio tracks thanks to QR codes embedded in the metal plates - Automatically sending information to the app concerning the number of people interacting with the public space - Emitting sounds that can be associated with the cultural heritage and instantly turned into documents of urban life.


Fig.38 Sound platform intervention

Problem Solving, The Urban intervention

6. Water Jet

A modern fountain that pops up from the intersection of the concrete paving. This simple water elements can create a lively and fresh environment in aggregation points and more quiet spaces for individual reflection. In both cases, when users are in the 10 meters range of action, they can control their intensity, their light and their rhythm through the app. This installation intents to trigger all the senses and is perfectly combinable with light and sound installations.

From Virtual to Physical - Identifying the installation on the map; controlling intensity, color and configuration of the water jets. From Physical to Virtual - Activating the app functions through movement - Automatically sending information to the app concerning the number of people interacting with the specificic installation.

Fig.39 Water jet intervention


7. Hortus Conclusus

A system of urban vegetable gardens might bring the citizen closer to their agricultural landscape and cultural heritage at the same time. The industrial heritage is surrounded by relevant portions of green areas that donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t have a specific function or that are just not used as much as they could. Therefore, the idea of creating spaces for the cultivation of plants and fruits inside the cluster might activate interesting relations inside these spaces, since citizens would start to recognize this land as their own and start to take care of it. Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s a sort of appropriation of the landscape, trying to find again the perfect balance between nature and work that has always been one of the principles behind Ivrea industrial heritage. The app in this case would facilitate the booking of these vegetable gardens and help users to cultivate (and eventually taste) their own food, with general information about plants and more specific statistics of the environmental sensors. From Virtual to Physical - Identifying the installation on the map; - Controlling weather, wind and soil conditions through the app features - Getting information about urban agricolture and specific plants - Controlling the property and use of the gardens From Physical to Virtual - Activating the app functions through the use of the gardens - Automatically sending information to the app concerning the number of people interacting with the specific installation, the quality of soil, the weather conditions, etc. - Possibly sharing the food with other people of the community.


Fig.40 Hortus conclusus intervention

Problem Solving, The Urban intervention

3.3.3 New interactions The map presents a background layer with the geometry of the grid, that repeats itself like a fractal the more you zoom in or out. The colored portions of the grid represent the spaces of possible interaction of the user with the public space. In order to access to the files of the cultural heritage specifically connected with that place, users can click on this areas and choose which document to analyze, either an historic picture, a technical drawing, a written text, a tweet, a recent Instagram photo, etc. This might stimulate citizens and tourists to explore the cluster museum online and experience the public installations on their own. The interaction options, indeed, will be visibile on the app - once clicked on the colored portion of the grid - but not possible to click from a distance. If the user wants to directly interact with this area of the grid, he must be located in the 10 meters range of action of the beacon technology sensors. Once the user has entered the area of connection, he or she can directly interact with some features of the installation, always assuming that someone else is not already using the same feature of the app at the same moment. In order to avoid interference with other users, the app recognizes the first user who entered in the zone and asked to interact with it, and it provides him or her the right to use the feature for a limited span of time, before others can take over and enjoy the same experience. It will be even possible to ‘book’ the use of a particular element of the public space (a screen, a bench, power plugs, etc) for the same amount of time. Some of the extended-use elements like the vegetable gardens can be booked for longer period or assigned to citizens in a democratic lottery system. If the demand for this elements of urban agriculture increases, for example, more would be installed in the second phase of intervention. Some installations, instead, like the interactive walls, don’t allow any booking, but are more oriented towards a randomly generated flow of data and a ‘serendipity’ system of discovering things. The screens that are placed behind the dynamic facade only switch on when people are passing by the selected area. Anyway, all the installations don’t require to be booked in order to be used in a traditional way. Elderly people or people who just don’t want to spend their time constantly with a smartphone in their hands, can still enjoy the warmth of a bench without modifying its position, or the freshness of a fountain without changing its jet and light configuration. A sort of mathematical expression is generated for the future phases of constructions. The interactions are different according to the qualities of the space where the interventions will be. For example, the parameters could be the number of buildings around it, the function of the area, the proximity of other installations, the quality of green spaces, the presence of a parking, the distance from the central station, etc. All these factors and a crowdsourcing business model that involve the citizens will influence the decision of the next phase of intervention. A visual installation that can be considered as a sort of eighth intervention - will then complete every phase of construction, connecting all the installations with a layer of paint that can give shape to the conceptual grid on the asphalt and act as traffic nudge for cars. For this purpose, a particular kind of paint was selected, able to absorb energy during the day and to glow in the dark at night, creating a new spectacular landscape where digital and physical coexist. 97

3.4 Business Model Canvas The group of users including local inhabitants and toursits through the smartphone application, mapping system and multisensory experience (grid) are involved in public space intervention, while on the other side educational institutions, tourist association, technology providers and local commercial sector employees at the same time due to their functional activity in the system have even the access to the online database. Map co-creation is available for all interested users. With the formation of the online community, all the involved users are intervening in the physical space through the use of application and installed technology devices (NFC system and iBeacon) in combination with on-site installations.


Business model canvas




_Municipality of Ivrea _UNESCO _Fondazione Adriano Olivetti _TELECOM Italia _GTT (Gruppo Torinese Trasporti) _FS (Ferrovie Dello Stato) _FAI (Fondo Ambiente Italia) _US (memoMAPP)

_Development of interactive virtual mapping platform _Promoting the heritage _User-curator _Virtual trails _Physical space interaction

_ Redifining Ivrea’s significance on global heritage map _Territorial promotion _Visibility implementation _Symbiosis of physical and digital space through public space interventions _Data base information for policy makers _Mulitylayered mapping platform

KEY RESOURCES _Open data, info systems, maps _Local inhabitants and visitors _MAAM (Museo dell’Architettura Moderna di Ivrea) _Ivrea -UNESCO candidacy _ICT - Forming the data base - Copyrights

COST STRUCTURES _Public multisensory instalation systems _ Digital mapping interface _ Initional promotional activities _Servers and bandwidth for free Internet access _Web hosting costs

CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIPS _Smartphone application _NFC system _Beacons _Social communities _Multisensory experience _Online support

CUSTOMER SEGMENTS _Local inhabitants _Tourists _Policy makers _Educational Institutions _Students _Tourist Association _Technology providers _Local commercial sector

CHANNELS _Smartphone application _Mapping system _Multisensory experience _Online database _Map co-creation

REVENUE STREAMS _Freemium _Advertising fees _Promotional vouchers


Business model canvas

Revenue model: How memoMAPP makes money? memoMAPP is focused on the value it provides, hence it takes the value. driven approach. The focus is on the creation and delivery of a high value platform which is highly customized to the user segmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s preferences. The ways to generate revenue streams are: 1.Advertising fees All interested parties that want to place ads on the app platforms pay a fee to be visible on the platforms. The bigger the customization of the ad (to a specific target group, for a specific data searched etc. the higher the fee) 2.Promotional vouchers A small percentage of the voucher`s use goes directly to memoMAPP 3.Freemium memoMAPP uses a freemium business model in which the base app data and layers are free and then generate revenue by selling premium products to a small percentage of free users. This leads to premium level fees 4.Premium level fees When a user requires long-term or continuous access to the maps for all other upgraded uses like researches, private business making based on user activity etc. with access to data on users, data on places frequented, real-time updates etc. they pay a subscription fee 5.Use fees for institutions and policy makers Public institutions, policy makers and similar institutional organizations can have a full access to data of the maps and uses of public space interventions in order to do city planning researches, decide on city maintenance interventions, check safety in different areas, see users` opinion on heritage and public space in specific locations etc. How memoMAPP finds users? 1.Social Media 2. Culture/heritage/architecture platforms 3.Promotional offers rom voucher partners 4.Affiliate Model 5. Word of Mouth


5 step model

The 5 Step model how memoMAPP works: Step 1 (Registrations on web/app map platform): memoMAPP gives users the possibility to create a profile and link it to any of their social media profiles without the initial obligation of uploading/ sharing any material. The map can be used in all its layers with/without being updated by the user. Step 2 (GPS use and updating): Users are asked to use GPS when interacting with the mobile app. The usersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; activity in browsing map data live transportation, places in the city etc. allows to track the existing peaks of concentration of people and suggest users the spots where physical interventions of memoMAPP are placed. Step 3 (interaction with monument): Users can follow the path of a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;mobile monumentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; (on-site intervention) with which they can discover the heritage and the potentials of a particular location. The urban interventions are designed to make people experience different sensorial emotions that could be related to the history of the place and educate them about the cluster museum they are surrounded by. Step 4 (movement of mobile monuments): Based on users` activities and feedback, some of the on-site installations can be occasionally moved to other locations, creating new poles for meeting, discovering and interaction. Step 5 (sharing of personal experience/memories): The users` interactions with mobile monuments can be recorded in forms of memories, experiences, photos, videos and then uploaded as a new layer of the map. The app thus becomes a living map of personal experiences and fresh histories.

Fig.41 The Five step model how memoMAPP works


3.5 Timeline of the Project Implementation For the project realization the first neccessary step is related with the mapping process, and afterwards parallel formation of cartographic map and interface database. Map is being upgraded with additional layers coming from social media connection that serve for users interaction on the map, whose activities’ path is further being traced for the constant update of the map. Along with the map update, the users movement is analized for individuating the points where on-site instalations are going to be placed. Once the intervention in the public space is done, the users have possibility of double interaction – both with online map and the on-site installation.

Continious update is being done, that further allows us to move these installations through the space according to the recording of users interactions. This, in the long term course improves the visitors and inhabitants’ involvement in heritage recognation and enhances the public space interaction with sensory experience, addresing sound, touch and olfactory, which should be inappropriate in a real museum surrounding. Using the multisensory experience the users are stimulated and involved in new digital and interactive public spaces.



1. Ivrea Regulation plan 2. Transportation 3. Hystorical video and photo heritage archive 4. UNESCO nomination candidacy



Object of our action










Digitalization of processed data



3 months







2 months observation/ depending on user factor

phase devided / each phase from 2-4 months



Conclusion 4

Conclusion and suggestions for the abstraction of the model The question of creating new digital and interactive spaces for museum clusters was a much complex issue that it had seen in the beginning. As soon as we make our way into the subject we understood that there was a lot of concepts and issues to deal with clarifying their meaning, their value and their perception in the new society. Thus, our first attempt was to lean ourselves to a strong theoretical part which help us to identify our vision. The most difficult part was to take a side and formulate our point of view concerning each of these concepts such as heritage, cluster museum, public space etc. That is why we found our self studying many rich litera-tures from different sources and trying to synthesize all we have found interesting in a strong statement which spell outs us and our vision. Subsequently, after the proclamation of our vision the practical part of the pro-ject was a natural process that almost self-developed. What memoMAPP project tries to do is to underline an emerging problem of the need of new inno-vative spaces for emerging museum clusters and to develop a possible programmatic solution which could eventually help administrations and institutions to make understand to the citizens, tourists and users of eve-ry kind the importance and the new meaning of heritage breaking itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s conventional perception developing a methodology which achieve to integrate the new heritage in to our daily life. We have focused on developing a methodology, which can be extracted as a model for any exiting or emerging museum cluster. We chose Ivrea as a case study to implement our model where the framework of the project remains equal but some specific elements regarding content, design and form especially in the second part of the project (the urban intervention) are adapted specifically to the city of Ivrea. Concerning the extraction of the model the virtual dimension of the project gained much importance that what we have though in the beginning and the digital Map which lend a sense of professionalism to communi-ty members and help them to make a stronger case to authorities and decisions makers gained a crucial and unique meaning. Furthermore, we have made an effort on the integration of ICT to physical spaces, as the new generation is an interesting shift factor of contemporary society towards the model of â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Digital Lifeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; which is an important prerequisite for regarding future transformation processes of the cities and the innovative procedures, in order to reach to a new interpretation of space for heritage. Our solution to a problem is not just a banal solution which remains in one dimensional and local-specific but it aims to be absolutely efficient and innovative proposing a bi-dimensional proposal of a potential model which can be abstract and adapt to any kind of location. The bi-directionality between the virtual and physical word is the crucial part and what makes memoMAPP a unique interpretation.

Bibliography - Abdel-Aziz A.A., Abdel-Salam H., El-Sayad Z., “The role of ICTs in creating the new social public place of the digital era.”, Alexandria Engineering Journal, Volume 55, Issue 1. March 2016. pp. 487–493 - Aleck, C.H.L., Fernandez, W.D., Shirley, G., “Understanding web enjoyment experiences and informal learning: A study in a museum context”, Elsevier, in Decision Support Systems 53 (2012) 846–858, 2012. -Anderson E. “Placemaking: A Tool for Rural and Urban Communities.”, 2013 - Aniscough, A., et All, “Psycology of children interacting with Museum”, U.S. science and technology museums-II, IEEE spectrum magazine, october 1995. - Bennet, T., “The Birth of the Museum”, 1995, Routledge - Boholm, A., ‘Reinvented histories: medieval Rome as memorial landscape’, Ecumene, Vol. 4 (3), 1997. - Bonifazio, P; Scrivano, P; “Olivetti costruisce, architettura moderna a Ivrea”, Guida al museo a cielo aperto, Skira edizioni, Milano, 2001. - Burdick, A., Drucker, J., Lunenfeld, P., Presner, T., Schnapp, J., “Digital Humanities”, The MIT Press, 2012 Massachusetts Institute of Technology - Calabrese, F., Diao, M., Di Lorenzo, G., Ferreira, J., Ratti, C., “Understanding individual mobility patterns from urban sensing data: A mobile phone trace example”, Elsevier, in Transportation Research Part C 26 (2013) 301–313 , 2012 - Canter, D., “The Psychology of Place”, London: Architectural Press. 1977 - Crawford, M., “The World in a Shopping Mall”, in Sorkin, M. Variations on a Theme Park: The New American City and the End of Public Space. New York: Hill and Wang. 1992 - Crouch, D., “The Street in the Making of Popular Geographical Knowledge”, in Images of the Streets, Fyfe N. (edit.). London: Routledge. 1998 - Damala, A., Cubaud, P., Bationo, A., Houlier, P., Marchal, I., ‘’ Bridging the Gap between the Digital and the Physical:Design and Evaluation of a Mobile Augmented Reality Guide for the Museum Visit’’, 3rd International Conference on Digital Interactive Media in Entertainment and Arts, Athens, Greece 2008. - De Souza e Silva, A., Frith, J. “Locative mobile social networks: mapping communication and location in urban space”, in Mobilities. Volume 5, Issue 4. pp. 485-506, 2010. - De Varine, H, “Patrimoni e territori”, in Territorio n° 68, 2014, pp.7-18 - De Waal, M., “The city as interface: How new media are changing the city”, Reflect #10. Rotterdam: nai010 publishers, 2014

- Dodgshon, R.A., “Human geography at the end of time; Some thoughts on the notion of timespace compression”, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, Vol. 17 (5), 1999. - “Dossier di candidatura Unesco”, may 2016 - “Draft Medium Term Plan 1990-1995” (UNESCO, 25 C/4, 1989) - Ferraris, M., “Documentalità - Perchè è necessario lasciar trace”, 2009, Laterza editore - Foster, H., “The Archive without Museums”, October, Vol. 77 (Summer, 1996), pp. 97-119, The MIT Press

- Friend N. McK., “A Review of Museum Literature and a Personal Critique Museology: The Evolution of a Socially Conscious Institution”, 2011, PhD thesis California Polytechnic State University - Frost-Kumpf, H. A, “Cultural Districts: The Arts as a Strategy for Revitalizing our Cities”, USA: Americans for the Arts. 1998 - Gallace, A.,Spence, C., “Multisensory Design, reaching Out to Touch the Consumer”, University of Oxford, UK, University of Milano-Bicocca, Italy - Harvey, D.C, “Heritage pasts and heritage presents: Temporality, meaning and the scope of heritage studies”, International Journal of Heritage Studies, Volume 7, no. 4, December 2001 - Hazan, S., Hermon, S., ’’On defining the Virtual Museum: A V-Must Research Project’’ , V-Must Thematic Network,March 2014 - Hoteit, S., Secci, S., Sobolevsky, S., Ratti, C., Pujolle, G., “Estimating human trajectories and hotspots through mobile phone data”, Elsevier, in Computer Networks 64 (2014) 296–307 , 2013 -Hsi, S., “I-Guides in Progress: Two Prototype Applications for Museum Educators and Visitors Using Wireless Technologies to Support Informal Science Learning“, Exploratorium, San Francisco, California, USA, Proceedings of the The 2nd IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (WMTE’04) , Computer and society. - ICOMOS, “The Dublin principles”, XVII Asemblee generale, Paris 2011 - Johnson N., “Discovering the city”, 1995, Museum International (UNESCO,Paris) - Johnson, P., Thomas, B., “Heritage as business”, in D.T. Herbert (ed.) Heritage, Tourism and Society, London: Mansell, 1995. - Jones, I. and Al., “Our Greatest Artefact: The city”, 2012, Istanbul: CAMOC -Jones, I. , MacDonald R. R., and McIntyre D., “City Museums and City Development. Plymouth: Altamira”, 2008

-Lord, B., “Manuel of Museum Learning”, 2007, AltaMira Press - Lynch, K., “The Image of the City”, the MIT press, 1960 - McCrone, D., Morris, A., Kiely, R., “Scotland –the Brand. The Making of Scottish Heritage”, Edinburgh: Polygon, 1995. - Mensch, P., “Towards a methodology of museology”, 1992, PhD thesis, University of Zagreb - Miles R. and Zavala L., “Toward the museum of the future”, 1994, Routledge - “Mockba 2.0”, in “Area” n°138, year XXVI 2015, january/february, - Mura, G., ’’Metaplasticity in Virtual Worlds: Aesthetics and Semantic Concepts’’, 2011, USA - Nikolić, “M. Ciudad de museos. Clústeres de museos en la ciudad contemporánea” / City of Museums. Museum Clusters in the Contemporary City. PhD thesis; Barcelona: Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya. 2011 - Nora, P., “Between Memory and History: Les Lieux de Mémoire”, Representations, No. 26, Special Issue: Memory and Counter-Memory (Spring, 1989), pp. 7-24, Published by: University of California Press - Olivetti, A., “Città dell'uomo”, Edizioni di Comunità (Roma), 2015 - Perez-Sanagustín, M., Parra, D., Verdugo, R., García-Galleguillos, G., Nussbaum, M., “Using QR codes to increase user engagement in museum-like spaces”, Elsevier, in Computers in Human Behavior 60 (2016) 73e85 , 2015 - “Piano di gestione”, Unesco, may 2016 -Radice, S.,“Designing for participation within cultural heritage; Participatory practices and audience engagement in heritage experience processes” Phd thesis, Politecnico di Milano, 2014. - Ross M., “Interpreting the new museolog”, 2004 - Schweibenz, W., ’’The “Virtual Museum”1 : New Perspectives For Museums to Present Objects and Information Using the Internet as a Knowledge Base and Communication System’’, Internationalen Symposiums für Informationswissenschaft (ISI 1998), Prag, 1998. -Shane, D.G. Heterotopias of Illusion; From Beaubourg to Bilbao and Beyond. in Dehaene and de Cauter. Heterotopia and the city: public space in a postcivil society, Oxford: Routledge. 2008 - Schnapp, J., “Animating the archive”,First monday, Vol. 13, n.8, Stanford Humanities Lab, Stanford University , 2008. - Smith Bautista S., ’’Museums in the Digital Age;Changing Meanings of Place, Community and Culture’’, 2014

- Skramstad, H., “An Agenda for American Museums in the 21st Century”, 2010, University of Michigan Library -Stupar A. Đukić A. Vis-à-vis communication? Digital and physical spaces of interaction in the contemporary city. REAL CORP 2015: PLAN TOGETHER – RIGHT NOW – OVERALL From Vision to Reality for Vibrant Cities and Regions. Ghent,Belgium. May 2005 - Tikka, H., Viña,S.,Jacucci, G.,Korpilahti, T., “Provoking the city—touch installations for urban space”, Digital Creativity, 2011, 200-214 - Tunbridge, J.E. , Ashworth, G.J., “Dissonant Heritage; The Management of the Past as a Resource in Conflict”, Chichester: Wiley, 1996. - Walter Benjamin ’’The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction’’, 1936. - Weil, S., “Rethinking the museum and other meditations”, 1990 -Wells, W., “Public/Private. The Future of Museums: Art Institutions in the Middle East”, 2006 -Welter, V.M. From locus genii to heart of the city. Embracing the spirit of the city. in Boyd W.I. Modernism and the Spirit of the City. London: Routledge. 2003 - Witcomb, A. Theorizing Digital Cultural Heritage: A Critical Discourse, MIT Press, 2010 Websites - Extension; VPr5PeF3JyE - PPS Placemaking and Place-Led Development: A New Paradigm for Cities of the Future 2005 -Beacon technology; - Meaning cloud; - Watchdogs; - Openstreetmap; - Chatty maps; Attended conferences and seminars - 3rd International Academic Conference: PLACES AND TECHNOLOGIES 2016, Belgrade, Serbia, April 2016. - OpenData4CulturalHeritage, Milano, Italy, May 2016.

Index of tables Table 1. City musuems case studies


Table 2. Virtual Museum Case Studies


Table 3. Cluster Museums Case Studies


Table 4. Digital Space vs. Public Space


Table 5. Multisensory experience


Table 6. Mapping Case studies


Table 7. Moscow vs. Ivrea


Table 8. Ivrea swot analysis


Table 9. Stakeholder identification


Table 10. Stakeholders categorization


Table 11. Importane of values per stakeholder


Table 12. Values gap analysis 1


Table 13. Values gap analysis 2


Table 14. Stakeholders management


Table 15. Business Model Canvas


Table 16. Timeline of the project


Index of figures Fig. 1 Tangible and intangible heritage Fig.2 Heritage cycle: How we can make past part of the future? Fig. 3 Introducing multimedia in the space of museums Fig. 4 Different theories about the role of Museum during history Fig. 5 Musuem image before and now Fig.6 Collaborative institutions in the musuem network(s) Fig. 7 Museum transition from “do not touch”sign to interaction Fig. 8 Inzovu curve Fig. 9 Diagram: Museums recognizing importance of digital technologies Fig. 10 Diagram: #museumselfie Fig. 11 Diagram of common relations between museum typologies Fig. 12 Smart City Concept Fig. 13 LG augmented reality 3D browser on Optimus 3D Fig. 14 SNCF adcampaign ‘Europe, It’s Just Next Door’, 2013 Fig. 15 Digital Water Pavilion in Zaragoza by Carlo Ratti Associati, 2008 Fig. 16 The Use of Near Field Communication Technologies in Museums Fig. 17 Layering of sensory experiences Fig. 18 Kate McLean “Smelly Maps” Fig. 19 Imaginary Moscow - the Schusev State Architecture Museum Fig. 20 View on Corso Jevis, the main axis in industrial part of Ivrea Fig. 21 Masterplan of the industrial buildings of the Ovlivetti factory Fig. 22 Map - from physical to virtual Fig. 23 Blurring boundries in a map Fig. 24 Week and strong documents in the map of Ivrea Fig. 25 Ingredients of a map Fig. 26 Analyzing tweets Fig. 27 Strong and weak documents added value Fig. 28 Web interface Fig. 29 Smartphone interface Fig. 30 Mapping of the 1st phase of intervention Fig. 31 Mapping of the 2nd phase of intervention Fig. 32 Mapping of the 3rd phase of intervention Fig. 33 Mapping of the 4th phase of intervention Fig. 34 Peephole intervention Fig. 35 Light pixels intervention Fig. 36 Wood pieceintervention Fig. 37 Smart potintervention Fig. 38 Sound platform intervention Fig. 39 Water jet intervention Fig. 40 Hortus conclusus intervention Fig. 41 How memoMAPP works?

14 15 15 16 16 17 18 18 25 31 37 38 39 39 39 42 44 48 51 52 52 66 66 69 71 72 77 80 81 85 85 86 86 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 99


memoMAPP_Museum Clusters ICT: New digital and interactive spaces for new museum clusters