Yes, the fundamentals are identical: find the threat, measure the vulnerability, estimate the impact, and choose the controls that give the best trade‑off. In a museum the stakes shift from human life to cultural loss and visitor safety, so the risk tolerance is tighter and the controls focus on preservation and access management. The method is the same, just the metrics change.

Curators do use risk matrices, but the “impact” column is usually a mix of damage cost and cultural value. A priceless fresco gets a huge weight on the impact side, so even a low‑probability visitor fall can push it into a high‑risk bucket. They’ll still run numbers—how many visitors, the weight of the frame, climate controls—but they let the history tip the scales. The end result is a controlled environment that protects the art while still letting people see it.