Mendeley  

Zotero  

Khadir S. (2025). Crisis Management Strategies for Protecting Outdoor Cultural and Artistic Works from Threats Caused by War. Athar. 46(110), 197-213. doi:10.61882/Athar.4154.2140
URL: http://athar.richt.ir/article-2-2140-en.html

Abstract
War is one of humanity’s most destructive crises, posing a serious and immediate threat to outdoor cultural heritage. Outdoor cultural and artistic works, as components of cultural heritage and identity-forming elements, play a decisive role in urban landscapes and in reinforcing collective memory. These emblematic works, often the product of prominent artists’ creativity, connect aesthetic, cultural, and social objectives within the urban fabric. Due to their dispersed nature across cities, inherent vulnerability, and the impossibility of relocation during war, they are susceptible to both direct (e.g., bombardment, shrapnel impact, and debris) and indirect damages (e.g., ground shaking from explosions, cracking, collapse, and environmental changes), as well as human harm. This article adopts a descriptive-analytical approach and, drawing on recent methodological studies, examines the major challenges of crisis management for these works and proposes practical strategies to strengthen protective capacities. Findings indicate that the key challenges in confronting war are: a general lack of awareness about these works, the absence of formal, practiced crisis-management plans tailored to them, severe shortages of funding and specialized equipment, weak interagency coordination in crisis conditions, and the absence of a precise, up-to-date information database to support rapid decision-making. In response to these challenges, this paper presents a multi-stage strategic framework (before, during, and after a crisis). Developing an operational rescue plan prioritizing preservation of the works, access mapping, and coordination protocols with security and military agencies and other relevant entities—is also a crucial component of this framework. The study concludes that a proactive approach, rather than a reactive one, implemented through investment in preparedness, training, and digital technologies, is the only viable path to enhancing the resilience of this irreplaceable heritage against potential devastation arising from war.
Keywords: Crisis Management, Outdoor Objects, War, Cultural Heritage, Conservation.

Introduction
Outdoor cultural heritage (including sculptures and cultural elements), as identity-building elements in the urban landscape, play a fundamental role in strengthening collective memory. A significant number of these works are either of historical value or are the creations of renowned national and international artists, many of which are registered in the National Register of Monuments. Due to their fixed nature, widespread dispersion in cities, and difficulty in moving, they become highly vulnerable during armed conflicts and social unrest, and face the threat of deliberate destruction and theft. Recent historical examples, from the deliberate destruction of the Buddha statues in Bamiyan to the widespread damage to cultural heritage in Ukraine, emphasize the need to address this issue. Motivated by this urgency, this article seeks to answer a fundamental question: “What are the most effective crisis management strategies for protecting outdoor cultural heritage from war-related threats?” The ultimate goal is to provide a systematic framework to reduce risk and increase the resilience of these valuable assets.

Discussion
Main challenges in protecting outdoor heritage during wartime Protecting outdoor heritage from war-related threats confronts complex, multi-dimensional challenges that can be categorized into five broad groups:
Physical and intrinsic challenges: The fixed, non-movable, and dispersed nature of these works makes them vulnerable to a wide range of threats. These threats include direct damage (shrapnel, bombs, collisions with military vehicles), indirect damage (ground shaking from blasts leading to cracks and collapse), environmental damages (chemical contamination, fluctuations in temperature and humidity), deliberate destruction motivated by ideology, and theft due to the material or artistic value of the works.
Administrative and planning challenges: These fundamental challenges manifest in the following items:
Lack of an operational, rehearsed plan: absence of a comprehensive, dedicated crisis-management program.
Unclear prioritization framework: no explicit framework to answer the critical question of “which work to save first?” based on criteria such as irreplaceability, national value, and vulnerability.
Absence of access maps and coordination protocols: lack of emergency access maps and transparent protocols for collaboration with military and security agencies, leading to delays and confusion during salvage operations.
FMultiple Governing Bodies and Dispersed Responsibilities: management of dispersed works by multiple bodies (e.g., Ministry of Culture heritage tourism, municipalities, Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance) causing role overlap and reduced efficiency under crisis conditions.
Financial and equipment challenges: Heritage protection budgets do not rank highly among national crisis priorities. Severe funding shortages, along with limited access to specialized materials and equipment (fire-suppressing coverings, protective gear, specialized cases) and a suitable transport fleet, constitute major obstacles.
Informational challenges: The absence of a unified, up-to-date information database for each asset (including technical data, precise location, and visual documentation) renders rapid and efficient decision-making in critical moments impossible.
Human and social challenges: These include a shortage of trained professionals capable of conducting salvage operations in hazardous conditions and a lack of public awareness about the value of these works, which results in protection not being prioritized by citizens or even decision-makers.
To overcome these challenges, a proactive, systematic, and cross-sectoral approach is necessary to enhance the resilience of this irreplaceable cultural heritage in the face of war.
To overcome these complex challenges, a multi-phased strategic framework is proposed that defines key actions in three phases.
Pre-crisis phase (Preparation and Prevention): This stage is the most important and decisive phase.
• Digital documentation: employing technologies such as 3D laser scanning and photogrammetry to create a secure and accurate archive for each outdoor artwork. These data form the foundation for all future protective and preservation actions.
• Development of a GIS database: creating an integrated geographic information system that collects technical data, precise locations, structural status, and 3D models of the artworks.
• Prioritization and risk assessment: forming a committee of specialists to rank artworks based on criteria such as national and international value, irreplaceability, and intrinsic vulnerability.
• Development of an operational rescue plan: drafting a concrete plan that clearly defines responsibilities, the chain of command, coordination protocols with security and military agencies, and the list of required equipment (Boylan, 1993).
• Training and capacity building: organizing training courses and simulated workshops for staff and the local community.
Crisis phase (Response and Action): This stage focuses on the rapid and precise execution of pre-identified plans.
• Activation of the Crisis Management Center for Cultural Heritage: establishing continuous liaison with security and military authorities.
• Execution of the rescue plan: initiating operations according to the prioritized sequence, including covering artworks with protective and fire-resistant materials, installing protective scaffolding, and, where feasible, evacuating smaller works to safe locations.
• Documentation of damages: recording all damages immediately after the incident for use in the recovery phase.
Post-crisis phase (Recovery and Reconstruction): This stage addresses damage repair and lessons learned for the future.
• Damage assessment: deploying expert teams to conduct precise damage evaluations using previously documented data.
• Emergency protection and stabilization: implementing initial measures to prevent further degradation, such as stabilizing at-risk structures.
• Review and update of plans: analyzing performance and updating crisis-management plans based on practical experiences gained.
   
Conclusion 
War, as a harsh reality of the contemporary world, seriously threatens the survival of outdoor cultural heritage, including statues and cultural elements. Findings from this study indicate that the only way to increase the resilience of this irreplaceable heritage is to adopt an active, systematic, and multidisciplinary approach grounded in precise planning, investment in technology, and training, as well as inter-agency coordination. In this context, the strategic framework presented in this article can serve as a practical roadmap for the overseeing institutions in Iran.
Effective implementation of this framework requires attention to strategies tailored to the material nature and the development of an interdisciplinary perspective. On the one hand, emergency protection of outdoor artefacts, predominantly metal and stone, demands planning aligned with the intrinsic properties of each material, prior to a crisis. Consequently, the choice of protective methods—from scaffolding and camouflage coverings to fill materials—must be made with meticulous regard to these properties to prevent secondary damage. Drafting an initial plan for each work, in which the optimal methods of covering, securing, and relocating are pre-determined according to material, dimensions, and environmental conditions, enables rapid and effective response in a crisis.
On the other hand, it should be emphasized that protecting heritage in times of war is not merely a technical issue; it is a fusion of international law, technology, crisis management, and policy. In this vision, investment in digital documentation and the promotion of international dialogue to establish “cultural safe zones,” even during wartime, constitute indispensable necessities in this field.
Finally, it must be stressed that protecting these works is not solely the responsibility of specialists, but a collective duty that demands national resolve and international cooperation. The future of our historical memory depends on the quality of protective actions taken today.