What Is Modern Heritage? Discovering the New Frontier of Architecture

Modern heritage (MH) is the newest layer of our built environment: buildings, neighborhoods, and infrastructure created from the late 19th century to the 1970s. Despite their importance, these places are often overlooked because they don’t fit neatly into “old” historic heritage or contemporary design. The *Heritage* article proposes a methodology to fill this gap: it examines texts, projects, and policies to define what truly counts as “modern.” The outcome is a conceptual map linking periods, themes, and typologies, showing that MH isn’t just 20th‑century architecture but a crossroads of technological, social, and environmental innovations. This new definition helps recognize, protect, and valorize structures like exposed‑brick houses, repurposed factories, or 1960s sports complexes. In practice, the research aims to make modern heritage more visible, accessible, and appreciated, urging institutions to include it in urban protection plans. Thus, cities can tell not only their ancient roots but also the recent stories of change and experimentation that shape our present.

The concept of modern heritage arises from the need to move beyond the traditional “old vs. new” dichotomy. Methodologically, the *Heritage* study adopts an interdisciplinary approach that combines documentary analysis, GIS (Geographic Information Systems), and cultural value assessment. The diagnostic phase starts from a corpus of 250 publications, articles, and regulations, classifying them into four macro‑categories: (1) construction typology (e.g., reinforced‑concrete structures, glass façades), (2) historical‑social context (e.g., post‑war building boom, modernist movements), (3) original and current functions (e.g., housing, repurposed industrial spaces), and (4) environmental impact (energy efficiency, reuse). GIS analysis maps the geographic distribution of sites, highlighting concentrations in rapidly developing urban areas. Moreover, cultural value assessment relies on criteria such as technological innovation, representation of architectural currents (Bauhaus, Brutalism), and the ability to testify to social transformations (e.g., internal migrations, changes of use). The outcome is a “significance” matrix that can guide authorities in designating protection zones. The methodology is replicable for other heritage types (industrial, digital) and provides a foundation for more inclusive conservation policies, integrating environmental sustainability with the valorization of recent heritage.