Driven by digital transformation and the ICOM 2022 definition (ICOM, 2022), museums are evolving from passive repositories into active agents of public engagement and co-creation, fostering education, social inclusion, and community resilience. This transformation reconceptualizes cultural objects as Buckland’s information-as-thing (Latham, 2012) – viewing artifacts as dynamic data sources whose value is activated through use – necessitating metrics for societal relevance and public value.

While impact assessment has matured beyond 1980s economic metrics (Bollo, 2013) to encompass social, participatory and sustainability dimensions (Hawkes, 2001; Kelly, 2006; Matarasso, 1997), traditional quantitative approaches remain insufficient to capture value in a ‘post-digital’ context. By frequently overlooking data curation quality, algorithmic ethics, and co-created knowledge, current approaches hinder demonstrating how digital humanities (DH) infrastructures foster engagement required for healthy democratic societies (European Commission, 2021, 2023; EGE, 2023; Tartari et al., 2023).

Aligned with the DARIAH agenda to foster socially responsive scholarship and strengthen connectivity between memory institutions and society through a public and participatory lens, this study demonstrates how integrating Digital Curation (DC) and DH creates infrastructure to map and evaluate public value of museum initiatives. Grounded in a qualitative, interpretivist comparative analysis of six international instruments (Europeana, SoPHIA, ISO 16687:2025, MOI!, inDICEs, CSIRO), the research identifies a disconnect between curatorial rigor and impact metrics, obscuring how digital infrastructures sustain civic engagement and social cohesion.

The proposed framework operationalizes a hybrid synergy, positioning DC as an innovation driver (Poole, 2017). Informed by lifecycle models like d-KISTI (Rhee, 2024), it integrates metrics for data quality (FAIR) and digital preservation (Higgins, 2018) to manage “information-as-thing” via the “collections as data” paradigm (Padilla, 2018) for maximum impact. Complementarily, DH acts as the analytical and participatory vector. It transforms curated data into value through methodologies like crowdsourcing to measure participatory outcomes (Liew & Cheetham, 2016; Marras et al., 2023). By fostering the ‘online sociability’ required for collaborative heritage construction (Liew, 2015), it enables new forms of learning through conversation with the public.

This synthesis leads to the Impact Assessment Model with Digital Curation and Digital Humanities (IAM-CDH). Integrating five core dimensions and 45 indicators, the framework operationalizes metrics to evidence curatorial rigor, public value and research impact by: assessing Digital and Informational Ecosystem governance (FAIR, AI bias mitigation); quantifying Participation and Co-Creation (citizen science, co-created outputs); measuring Sociocultural and Educational Impact (digital literacy, social inclusion, educational use of curated data); evaluating Culture as a Sustainability Pillar; demonstrating Innovation and Interdisciplinary Collaboration (open data reuse, cross-sector partnerships).

Linking the technical rigor of DC with the interpretive power of DH, the IAM-CDH provides an evidence infrastructure for impact demonstration. It aims to support memory institutions in accountability and strategic planning, moving beyond reach metrics to address core questions of cultural heritage, shared memory and societal justice while highlighting the potential for ethical, sustainable change generated by digital strategies in contemporary museums. Currently a conceptual framework, future work focuses on empirical validation in diverse memory institutions to assess contextual applicability and practical feasibility, alongside developing simplified tools for agile data collection.