Now that Italy has laid to rest the 289 victims of an 6.3 magnitude earthquake earlier this month, continuing rescue missions in L’Aquila and other damaged areas will take on a new focus—the rescue of irreplaceable art and other items of historical importance.

Worldwide, there has been much interest in the extent—and the possible restoration—of earthquake-damaged artwork and historical buildings. The desire to help has been so strong that, according to Italy’s ANSA news agency, Italy has created a list of 38 monuments in the earthquake-torn region of Abruzzo that are up for “adoption” by foreign countries that want to help. The New York Times reports that more than 11,000 volunteers have stepped forward to help with cultural restoration.

While such widespread concern and willingness to save the world’s cultural treasures is heartening, some might say it comes at the wrong end of the disaster cycle. Although money is often cited as the culprit for not implementing mitigation measures on the front end an earthquake, it doesn’t have to stand in the way, said well-known antiquities conservator Jerry Podany in a recent interview with the Wall Street Journal.

“After this earthquake in Mexico some years back, I was infuriated because I walked into a museum storeroom and saw shelves with broken vases,” he said. “The shelves weren't tied to the building. You'd push them and they'd wobble, even though tying one to the wall would've cost $2 for wire, brackets and screws. People want to learn all these sophisticated ways to isolate and decouple artworks from their pedestals, but I don't want to start there. I check the shelves first and ask, are they sturdy or worm-eaten? Are the heaviest things on the bottom shelf?”

Historic buildings, however—and the elaborate frescos and murals that will crumble with their walls—are another matter, one that Italy has grappled with for a while. In 2007, the Culture Ministry issued a call to local authorities to assess structures and monuments for seismic risk and determine what was needed to reduce vulnerability, according to a New York Times article that year.

With more than 64 percent of the country at medium to high risk of serious earthquake damage, that means about 500,000 buildings would need to be examined and retrofitted—from existing jurisdictional budgets, according to the Times. It’s no surprise that, despite what’s at stake, the same culture-spanning momentum stopper has clogged efforts.

“If the building is culturally important—having, say, a significant fresco—then making sure it doesn’t collapse isn’t enough. You have to limit the damages too,” Culture Ministry architect Laura Moro told the Times in 2007. “The problem is getting people to set limited funds aside for something that can’t be predicted, like an earthquake.”