Small site conservation in the scope of territorial cohesion

Conservation and restoration of archaeological structures often matter to academic literature for reasons of technical complexity, lessons learned, and innovation. Yet the vast majority of such activities are the result of low complexity micro-planning, and will not stand out for any particular reason, as they fail to significantly add to the overall body of knowledge. Not considered in this sort of assumption are the counterfactual impacts on territorial planning, in both low-density and urban areas such as the ones used below as case studies. Key aspects are the socioeconomic articulations with specific local communities, their livelihoods and traditions, and the possible insights on the injection of resources in heritage-induced development. Simply put, not all archaeological sites should undergo commodification in the first place, and physical conservation makes little sense in the absence of enveloping, non-archaeological forms of sustainability.