**2. Materials. The Archaeological Basin of Tornambé**

The archaeological basin of Tornambé (municipality of Pietraperzia, Italy) (Figures 1 and 2) was chosen as an example of the archaeological heritage that is not part of the main tourist itineraries. In Italy, parks or archaeological sites of great importance are visited every year by several million tourists, e.g., the "Colosseum and Roman Forum" archaeological park in Rome had about 7.6 and Pompeii 3.6 million visitors in 2018, with revenues of 53.8 and 39.6 million euros respectively [61]. In Sicily, which is the Italian region where Tornambé is located, the numbers of visitors to the archaeological sites are lower. In fact, in 2018 the visitors were 928,952 and 354,941, with revenues of 6.6 and 2.6 million euros respectively in the "Valle dei Templi" archaeological park in Agrigento and in the "Villa romana del Casale" archaeological area in Piazza Armerina [62].

The Tornambé site is located in central Sicily on the top of a rocky ridge in a system of the hills Monte Grande, Tornambè, Rocche di Tornambè, Monte Cane, Cozzo Cialandria e Parcazzo that delimit the valley of the Imera river. The area is of great naturalistic value, in fact, the ridge above the Imera river has been recognized as a Site of Community Importance (according to the Ministry of the Environment Decree 3 April 2000) in order to preserve biological diversity, as it constitutes

an emblematic example of the Mediterranean bio-geographic region characteristics. In addition, the area is part of the "Monte Capodarso and Imera valley" nature reserve.

**Figure 1.** Geographical location of the archaeological basin of Tornambé.

**Figure 2.** Ethno-anthropological and archaeological constraints in the Province of Enna, and the archaeological basin of Tornambé.

This area is of archaeological interest as it has been inhabited for millenniums, since the prehistoric age, given their strategic location of controlling the Imera valley [63]. In fact, several excavation campaigns, from 2002 to 2012, found evidence of settlements dating back to the third millennium BC until the Greek age in the VII–VI century BC [64]. The surface reconnaissance activities and excavation campaigns from 2003 to 2007 (financed by Progetti Integrati Territoriali—PIT 11.496 of Programma Operativo Regionale—POR Sicilia 2000–2006) and another two excavation campaigns in 2008–2009, that were carried out thanks to a cooperation between the Municipality of Pietraperzia, the Sopritendenza BB.CC.AA. of Enna and a local Centro studi archeologici, allowed to expose the remains of a large necropolis and a village from the Copper Age (2700–2300 BC), the latter is formed of numerous huts having circular structures [65–67]. In this area, many pottery sherds, as glass or pot fragments, are present. Petrographic and mineralogical analyses carried out on ceramic samples dated them from the Copper Age to the Early and Middle Bronze and evidenced a certain continuity regarding the supply of raw material for a very long period, independently of the different cultural phases [68]. Moreover, in the site, there are numerous 'oven' tombs from the Bronze Age (2300–1600 BC), as well as some chambered tombs even monumental in size and other architectural elements dating back to the archaic Greek age (VII–V century BC). Furthermore remains of a *phrourion*, that was a military outpost consisting of rectangular rooms and cisterns dug into the rock, are located on the top of a hill to protect of the settlement [69]. In 2012 another excavation campaign started thanks to an agreement between local public authorities and a private local cultural association. Nevertheless the numerous archaeological finds, currently, accessibility to the site is difficult and there are no services for tourists, with the exception of some information panels and some paths inside the area, and only a few people sporadically visit the site on the initiative of local cultural associations.

The site of Tornambé is located in a wider territorial, environmental and landscape context which is the result of the essential integration between cultural and natural values, as it can be seen from the thematic maps, that have identified the territorial resources of the network within an area of approximately 2200 hectares, such as other minor archaeological sites, some places of naturalistic value, e.g., the San Giorgio or Monte Grande springs, or of testimonial interest such as the Monte Cane mine.

The Province of Enna government has mainly focused on the cultural policy of the archaeological heritage on the most important sites of the Province, Piazza Armerina (Villa del Casale) and Aidone (Morgantina). However, in recent years, the growing eco-environmental sensitivity and the general touristic demand diversification trend, integrating cultural and landscape heritage, as well as social events, local food and wine products, etc., have segmented users and induced the redistribution of a share of tourist demand towards inland areas of Sicily. In this context, the Tornambé site has the potential to capture part of the existing tourist flows to which to propose a composite offer, according to the concept of integrated conservation of the territory, thanks to numerous factors such as the proximity to the massive tourist flows of Piazza Armerina and Aidone and to a high-speed thoroughfare, the favourable altitude position with consequent landscape value. Furthermore, the site presents a remarkable complex of geomorphological, hydrogeological and vegetation values, integrated into the ethno-anthropological and cultural context of a still unspoiled territory, to which such an ancient and rare archaeological framework can give a primary and original significance.

This opportunity for enhancement generates, as a virtuous aspect, the involvement of local economic activities and a broader awareness of the value identity of places and also the strengthening of social cohesion. This prospect fits the progressive dematerialisation trend of an economy as for the contribution that the increase of the cultural-contemplative services demand can provide: 1. to rebalance the town/countryside relationship as for the location demand of people and businesses, 2. to rebalance the relationship between mass and cultural—as well as between inland and coastal—tourism, in support of the preservation of the cultural estate territorial framework.

### **3. Methods. Territorial, Economic and Landscape Communication**

This study explores some aspects of multiscale integrated analysis, valuation and project approach to the protection and promotion of widespread archaeological heritage, in a territory, such as the Province of Enna, characterized by low-value-density cultural networks, and as a consequence by the emotional rarefaction of the "tactile experience".

In this context, the weak structure of the archaeological outcrops constitutes the main and original resource of cultural heritage which rediscovers its "original magnificence" in the shared awareness of the complex value expressed by the entirety of the landscape unit [70].

Accordingly, a general framework connecting territorial knowledge, economic valuations and cultural policies have been the methodological reference of this experience (Figure 3).


**Figure 3.** The general valuation-project communicative framework.

This evaluation experience tries to connect aspects of the organization of knowledge, formalized with the use of GIS [71–77], with the economic analysis tools for efficient and effective management of the territorial cultural heritage, in a territorial context characterized by a low-value density.

The well-known economic unbalance and financial unfeasibility of the cultural enterprise typically aimed at providing streams of contemplative services, thus pursuing the growth of the immaterial component of the social territorial estate, is mostly due to the asymmetry between monetary, certain, initial, point and higher costs, on the one hand, non-monetary, uncertain, differed continuous and minimal, although widespread, benefits on the other hand.

Accordingly, the proposed analyses aim at defining the conditions of the cost-effectiveness of an archaeological-landscape network plan as conceptual and operative support to the cultural-asset-oriented territorial-landscape policies.

In such a complex decision-making prospect, one of the main theoretical and methodological criticalities of appraisal/valuation science arises, that is its relationship with project/planning activity [78]. Even today, valuation is considered to be a simple tool of design, whose output—at the end of a somehow self-referential design process—is verified by valuation, turning this design output into a social outcome. From such a perspective, a project is connected to representation and the decisions have a weak relation to the layer of shared values [79]. In this case, a top-down communication process is established, in which economic valuation plays the role of validating the choices coming from the top [80,81].

The basic hypothesis of this perspective inversion is that this valuation/project relationship can be reversed so that the integration of economic valuation in the project process can integrate top-down and bottom-up decision-making processes, thus improving social-economic communication.

Accordingly, this experiment covers three "communication areas":


### *3.1. Territorial Communication. Representation as a Prospect for Identifying the Archaeological Basins*

The representation of territory through the prism of the landscape has been carried out in Sicily by means of the Guidelines of the Regional Landscape Territorial Plan [84] approved in 1999. Each of the nine Sicilian Provinces has or should have, draw its own Provincial Landscape Territorial Plan (PTLP) as the province of Enna did [85].

This document can be considered a territorial communication tool as for the standardized basic land information basing on which the activities of transformation and preservation of territorial and landscape units should be ruled.

Accordingly, the identification of the archaeological constraints of the Province of Enna [86] was carried out by first identifying the sites surveyed by the above-mentioned PTLP, from whose geodatabase the information and assessments characterizing their landscape relevance were extracted. Subsequently, the various sites were grouped into clusters—internally homogeneous and externally, that is compared to each other, heterogeneous—on the basis of similarity and complementarity relationships, whose parameters can be modified so as to allow the generation [87] of alternative configurations.

The relations of similarity and complementarity concern the original distinction of the basic three landscape components:


The 229 sites of the Province have been included in a database, of which they are the records and whose fields are the relevant characteristics extracted from the PTLP, the territorial profile of each of them has been defined in terms of compliance with a specific landscape matrix: 1. Agricultural, 2. Vegetational, 3. Geological, 4. Anthropic, 5. Cultural, 6 Infrastructural, 7. Architectural.

The landscape profile is represented by measurements that define value functions such as distances from infrastructures, presence of attractors or detractors, presence and consistency of valuable areas included within an established buffer. The themes are: historical, contemporary and railway roads; territorial and archaeological constraints; the presence of isolated goods; quarries and landfills; reserves, forests, Sites of Community Interest (SIC) and Special Protection Areas (SPAs); land uses; habitats; geological structure.

Furthermore, in order to define and identify the archaeological basins, the matrix of the mutual geometric distance of the sites was calculated to verify the spatial continuity of the basin with reference to the usability of the sites included in it.

The value functions of the individual thematic characteristics were subsequently defined for each of the seven landscape matrices, and for each of the latter, a specific system of weights has been established, that allows aggregating the characteristics in the seven scores for each site, with reference to each landscape matrix [88].

Among all the basins of the Province of Enna, the archaeological network of Tornambè (Figure 2) has been identified as an archaeological network currently characterized by a low-density archaeological value but having a relevant potential due to the multilayer connections between the landscape matrixes above described.

Once identified, the Tornambè basin was characterized through a detailed representation of its axiological and aesthetic layout, on the basis of which it was considered possible to prefigure a general scenario of development of the archaeological research, sustainable touristic experience and culture-oriented economic promotion.

### *3.2. Socio-Economic Communication Project as a Valuation Tool in the Archaeological Asset Development*

The creation of a social-economic communication tool is the operational core of this experiment, aimed at measuring the economic profitability and the financial feasibility [89] of a standard archaeological basin development project by carrying out a Discounted Cash Flow Analysis [90]. The project hypothesis includes the actions (investments and management activities) requested to connect and develop the works aimed at creating the cultural assets and the related management operational unit involving a wide platform of private and public players.

In addition to the results of the territorial quantitative and qualitative analysis, the functions of the Geodatabase allowed us to extract and coordinate the spatial data necessary for the drafting of the preliminary project and the economic calculation of the development hypothesis.

Although the archaeological basins of the Province of Enna are quite different from each other, this hypothesis can be considered a sort of pilot project whose economic-monetary ratios provides standardized information about the interactions of the different players and the related instances and interests.

As well known, the DCFA is the comparison of revenues and costs of an investment within a given time span, the time horizon of the project [91]. The first step of this economic knowledge analysis has been the calculation of revenues and costs that have been carried out basing on their unit size.

The unit revenues were taken basing on specific market surveys of the goods and services that can be placed on the market. The total revenues were calculated according to a prudent scenario [92] concerning the users that could be attracted by implementing the activities included in the contemplative, recreational and educational program.

The unit costs have been taken both from specific market analyses and (especially for the building works) from the Bill of quantities for the Public Works of Sicilian Region 2018. The total costs have been calculated based on the dimensions of the involved geo-referenced areas and paths which have included in the geodatabase and whose development or renovation is supposed.

In order to make comparable the investment (point) costs (*Cp*) to the annual operating (continue) costs and revenues, the former have been transformed in streams of constant annuities (*Ci*) by associating to each of them the economic lifetime (*n*) of the corresponding asset and, according to the current financial market interest rate (*rd*) [93], the annuity was calculated by the following amortization formula:

$$\overline{\mathcal{C}}\_i = \mathcal{C}\_p \frac{r\_d (1 + r\_d)^n}{\left(1 + r\_d\right)^n - 1} \tag{1}$$

Furthermore, in order to quickly develop scenario analyses, the economic evaluation model is set up to enable or disable items, to attribute these items to different actors, to modify all the financial variables involved, such as the discount rate [94,95], the interest rate on amortization and so on.

The cost-effectiveness for the private entrepreneurial player, in this case, a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV), can be represented according to the following results and indices:

1. the Net Present Value (*NPV*) is the sum of the incoming and outgoing cash flows, that is revenues (*R*) and costs (C), over a defined time horizon (*T*), discounted at the discount rate *r*. NPV is less, equal or more than the (net) Future Value (FV) if the discount rate (*r*) is more, equal or less to 0, *NPV* is expected to be significantly positive in case of a private player:

$$NPV = \sum\_{i=0}^{T} \frac{R\_i - C\_i}{\left(1 + r\right)^i} \ge 0 \tag{2}$$

2. the Total Rate of Return (*TRR*), that is the more significant index of profitability thus the ratio between *NPV* and the present cost, *TRR* should be greater than the opportunity cost of capital *c*.

$$TRR = \frac{\sum\_{i=0}^{T} \frac{\mathcal{R}\_i - \mathcal{C}\_i}{(1+r)^t}}{\sum\_{i=0}^{T} \frac{\mathcal{C}\_i}{(1+r)^t}} \ge c \tag{3}$$

3. the Internal Rate of Return (*IRR*), that is the discount rate *rIRR* at which *NPV* = 0, that is the maximum rate of return that can be extracted by an investment. It only depends on the distribution of the stream along the time horizon of the investment:

$$\sum\_{i=0}^{T} \frac{R\_i - C\_i}{\left(1 + r\_{IRR}\right)^i} = 0 \tag{4}$$

4. the External Rate of Return (*ERR*)—also called Modified Internal Rate of Return (MIRR)—refers to both the cost of the investment and the interests on reinvested cash, and is calculated on the basis of an interest rate external to the investment, at which net (positive) cash flows generated by the investment over its time horizon can be invested or borrowed *r*∗ . The External Rate of Return *r*∗ *<sup>e</sup>* is the rate at which the investment costs discounted at the rate *r* equals the future value at time *T* of the positive Cash Flows (*CFi*(>0)) deferred at the rate *r*<sup>∗</sup> , given *CFi* = *Ri* − *Ci*, in other words, ERR is the IRR of an ideal investment whose unique cost is the initial investment cost calculated as the NPV at the rate *r* of the negative cash flows over the time horizon *T*, and whose unique revenue is the future value (at year T) of the positive cash flows at the rate *r*∗ , this particular IRR is *re*.

$$\sum\_{i=0}^{T} \frac{CF\_{i\text{-}(\text{<0})}}{\left(1 + r\_{\text{f}}\right)^{i}} = \sum\_{i=0}^{T} CF\_{T-1\text{-}(\text{>0})} \left(1 + r^{\*}\right)^{T-i} \tag{5}$$

5. the Elasticity (*Er*), that is the marginal *NPV* at the discount rate *r*:

$$E\_I = \frac{\frac{\delta NPV\_r}{\text{NPV}\_r}}{\frac{\delta \mathcal{F}}{r}} \tag{6}$$

6. the Discounted Payback Period (*DPP*) is the number of years it takes to break even from undertaking the investment cost (*I*0) by discounting future cash flows and recognizing the time value of money (*r* > 0), the higher the discount rate, the longer the *DPP*, more simply, a Payback Period (*PP*) can be calculated without taking into account the time preference rate (*r* = 0). In general, *PP* is the ratio between the total investment cost and the annual constant or average cash flow. Often, the variability of the cash flow over the lifetime of the project reduces the reliability of the formulas usually implemented for *DPP*, so that a more general formula can be proposed considering *NPV*(*i*), and then:

$$DPP = i\_{NPV(\hat{\imath}) = 0} \tag{7}$$

7. the Average Period at the rate *r* (*APr*) [48], that is a sort of time elasticity, that can be considered as the average period of deferral of the *ith* annual net discounted Cash Flows (*CFi*) given the discount factor,

$$AP\_r = \frac{\sum\_{i=0}^{T} i \frac{CF\_i}{(1+r)^i}}{\sum\_{i=0}^{T} \frac{CF\_i}{(1+r)^i}} \tag{8}$$

The discount rate *r* is an important indicator of the intertemporal social solidarity practised with the implementation of the project, and it enables two different and complementary prospects, the private one as means, the public one as scope.

Concerning the first one, the discount rate can be assumed as the well-known Weighted Average Cost of Capital (*WACC*), referred to the funds in terms of Debt (*D*) and Equity (*E*),

$$\text{WACC} = \frac{i\_d D + i\_c E}{D + E} \tag{9}$$

where *id* is the interest rate for debt and *ie* is the opportunity cost of equity, that can be respectively referred to the active and passive interest rates charged to households and consumers, according to the statistics of Bank Italia (2017), set at 4.66% (over a 5 years life of the loan) and 0.12%, assuming leverage of 50%, *WACC* is 2.39%.

Concerning the second one, although the economic-financial valuation is carried out here form the private player perspective, it should be remarked that the whole project involves a wide range of public players providing the private one with the political-administrative support and the socio-cultural context allowing the business success.

As a consequence, as for the size as well as for the role it plays in the socio-economic intergenerational communication, the discount rate can be considered to be a sort of Social Discount Rate that the extensive literature on the subject [96] agrees should have a nearly zero value. The prospect of an economic communication able to involve as many players as possible encourages researchers to support a low-discount rate territorial-economic culture as one of the fundamental pillars of sustainability involving the relationship between the social system and the environment in the prospect of establishing of an actual and effective landscape communication.

### *3.3. Landscape Communication. Valuation as a Programming Tool in the Archaeological Asset Protection*

The central role that landscape should play in the social and economic communication, in the specific field of the enhancement of the land cultural asset, demands the convergence of the social-economic players' perspectives (the viewpoints) towards sustainability (the vanishing point), once outlined the actions and the financial-economic profile of the archaeological basin development hypothesis.

The early comparison of revenues and costs provides the decision-makers with:


Both the results encourage and guide the decision-makers (as part of the political-administrative social sub-system) the stockholders (as part of the economic-financial social sub-system) and the stakeholders (as parts of the cultural sub-system) to converge towards a shared arrangement of tasks and economic-financial commitments. This convergence is supported by the hoped shared awareness that the amount of costs that cannot be covered by the revenues represents the economic measurement of the minimum social value of this archaeological-landscape asset. Such awareness supports the improvement of the landscape communication if: 1. this cost surplus is actually incurred by the political-administrative and cultural sub-systems, 2. such political-cultural choice is shared by the public. Now, concerning the two complementary functions of the revenue-cost comparison:


The focus on the stake/stock-holders relationship is one of the several oppositions which the economic valuation usually deals with, each of these oppositions can often also result in a form of complementarity. The unavoidable overall economic unprofitability and financial infeasibility of the development of a landscape-archaeological unit intended to cultural, contemplative and recreational uses, is a measurement of the opposition, and somehow of the complementarity, between:


This conflict, in turn, highlights the intrinsic complementarities of different dimensions of the landscape that is an overarching entity including and displaying in a typically multifaceted shape its own complexities and contradictions.

Accordingly, the economic-financial variables have been assumed as project/program items and as such, they have been organized within a general conceptual and operative framework (Table 1) coordinating:


Each of the three above-mentioned general objectives has been represented outlining the related programming actions grouped according to the multiscale approach involving activities devoted to:



### **Table 1.** Framework of the project.

The path along the main diagonal of the matrix reports the stages of actions ranging from the immaterial services to the material goods, and from the general context to the particular places, as described below.

*1-1 Research*/*territory*. The creation of a descriptive Geo-Database/Web-GIS of the basin is one of the basic tools of territorial marketing. It should be organized according to the description of the different levels included in the local landscape units with reference to abiotic, biotic and anthropic systems, and could be available for queries from scholars, entrepreneurs, designers and public administrations.

*1-2 Research*/*basin*. Surface reconnaissance activities are planned to detect the presence of not yet known archaeological sites.

*1-3 Research*/*site*. Stratigraphic research and excavation campaigns are planned to increase the cultural offer of each site with reference to the volume and archaeological value of the remains. These activities must be diversified between the sites in relation to their potential but also with respect to the organization within the basin which is aimed at differentiating potential itineraries.

*2-1 Experiencing*/*Territory*. A section of the Web-Gis, by means of specific toolbars, could allow the potential users to customize the itinerary according to specific interests, preferences and cultural themes. Specialistic information can be stored and made available for scholars and institutions after prior accreditation and certification.

*2-2 Experiencing*/*Basin*. Maintenance works are planned for the main connection routes to improve the coordinated fruition of the sites included in the itineraries of greatest overall cultural value. Actions are also planned to improve touristic accommodation and services (agritourism, catering, riding stables, bicycle shelter and rental), infrastructures (roads and car parks), entertainment (temporary and removable structures).

*2-3 Experiencing*/*Site*. The following actions are planned: the realization of lighting systems, panels and fences, the redevelopment of internal paths, etc.

*3-1 Promoting*/*Territory*. The enhancement of the territory is obtained by creating connections with regional and provincial cultural events. The Web-GIS platform stores information on the most important cultural events and provides the potential itinerant archaeological-naturalistic events such as exhibitions, festivals and theatrical performances.

*3-2 Promoting*/*Basin*. Temporary and permanent laboratories will be set up in the archaeological, ethno-anthropological, botanical, geological, etc. fields, in collaboration with associations and universities.

*3-3 Promoting* /*Site*. Didactic and cultural events and performances are planned compatibly with the features of the different archaeological sites. In the most important sites, the remains can be musealized in new exhibition open spaces and new or reused ancient buildings. Other buildings are supposed to be intended to the restoration of the most important archaeological remains, also within workshops and open laboratories.

Accordingly, all the actions envisaged by the project hypothesis, have listed in the rows of a database divided into three sections each of which is sub-divided into three sub-sections. The columns, i.e., the fields, of the database report the characteristics arranged so as to perform scenario and sensitiveness analyses coherent with the above-mentioned three-parts subdivision, as below:

