Cultural heritage and risk assessments: Gaps, challenges, and future research directions for the inclusion of heritage within climate change adaptation and disaster management

Cultural heritage and risk assessments: Gaps, challenges, and future research directions for the inclusion of heritage within climate change adaptation and disaster management
复制标题

文化遗产和风险评估:将遗产纳入气候变化适应和灾害管理的差距、挑战和未来研究方向

DOI:
10.1002/cli2.45
复制
发表时间:
2022
期刊:
Climate Resilience and Sustainability
影响因子:
--
通讯作者:
Crowley K
Crowley K
中科院分区:
--
文献类型:
--
作者:
Crowley K

文献摘要

参考文献

被引文献

相似文献

文化遗产塑造我们的身份、提供能力并暴露脆弱性,但传统的风险评估很大程度上忽略了文化遗产的价值和脆弱性。风险评估是确定气候变化适应(CCA)和灾害管理有效机制的基本第一步。然而,由于忽视了遗产的影响,决策者限制了他们对风险的理解,因此限制了对建设和维持当地复原力至关重要的机会。我们综合了过去 15 年有关文化遗产风险评估的同行评审文献,得出的结论主要针对 CCA,但对灾害管理具有更广泛的影响。我们发现,对遗产的无形方面及其对风险和复原力的影响的研究严重缺乏。在所有文献中,风险评估主要侧重于与脆弱性或适应能力无关的暴露,并且在包含脆弱性的情况下,没有一致的定义或标准。我们强调,最常用的方法与当地社区价值观、经验和与遗产实践和习俗相关的知识的接触很少。社区参与通常与“专业专家”而不是当地社区的成员相关。此外,全球南方国家的代表性严重不足,研究偏向于欧洲和北美。我们建议对未来的评估采取敏捷的方法,并调整风险工具的研究和开发,以纳入参与性方法。未来的气候风险框架必须纳入社区规模的价值观,以了解文化遗产在适应能力、脆弱性和复原力方面的作用。
Cultural heritage shapes our identity, delivers capacities, and exposes vulnerabilities, yet cultural heritage value and vulnerability are largely missing from conventional risk assessments. Risk assessments are a fundamental first step in identifying effective mechanisms for Climate Change Adaptation (CCA) and disaster management. However, by ignoring the influence of heritage, decision makers are limiting their understanding of risk and therefore opportunities vital for building and maintaining local resilience. We present findings from a synthesis of peer‐reviewed literature from the last 15 years on cultural heritage risk assessment for primarily CCA but with wider implications for disaster management. We identify a significant lack of research examining intangible aspects of heritage and their influence on risk and resilience. Across the literature, risk assessments focus largely on exposure in isolation from vulnerability or adaptive capacity and where vulnerability is included there is no consistent definition or criterion. We highlight that the most frequently used methods have minimal engagement with local community values, experience, and knowledge relating to heritage practice and customs. Community engagement is most often associated with ‘professional experts’ rather than members of a local community. Furthermore, the Global South is severely under‐represented with a research bias towards Europe and North America. We recommend an agile approach to future assessments with the adjustment of risk tool research and development to include participatory approaches. Future climate risk frameworks must incorporate community‐scale values to understand the role of cultural heritage in relation to adaptive capacity, vulnerability, and resilience.
DOI: 10.3390/su12229429
发表时间: 2020-11
期刊: Sustainability
影响因子: 3.9
作者:
Meghan C. L. Howey
通讯作者: Meghan C. L. Howey
DOI: 10.1111/arcm.12593
发表时间: 2020-08-07
期刊: ARCHAEOMETRY
影响因子: 1.6
作者:
Fenger-Nielsen, R.;Elberling, B.;Hollesen, J.
通讯作者: Hollesen, J.
文化遗产和海平面上升威胁:加那利群岛沿海防御工事的风险评估
DOI: --
发表时间: 2020
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
F. Sánchez;Héctor Sánchez;C. Ribalaygua
通讯作者: C. Ribalaygua
对资源价值和气候变化影响进行建模以设定保护和研究优先事项
DOI: 10.1080/13505033.2018.1545204
发表时间: 2018
影响因子: 0.2
作者:
Michael Heilen;J. Altschul;Friedrich Lüth
通讯作者: Friedrich Lüth
构建灾难:试图理解危害、脆弱性和风险的理论和故事
DOI: --
发表时间: 2012
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
B. Wisner;J. Gaillard;I. Kelman
通讯作者: I. Kelman