EarthSciencesComparativeMatrix
A Comparative Method for Geoheritage Assessment
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 5696255 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Susan White (0000-0003-1249-8603, La Trobe University, corresponding author), Gresley A Wakelin‐king, Gresley Wakelin-King (0000-0003-1328-2644, La Trobe University) |
| Year | 2014 |
| Volume | 52 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 168-181 |
| Publication date | 2014-05-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Geographical Research (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1745-5863 • E-ISSN: 1745-5871 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/1745-5871.12062 |
| OpenAlex | W2076591117 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
| References cited | 23 |
Geological heritage is insufficiently recognised inAustralia; it should be considered in its own right, not as an addendum to other heritage values. The lack of a suitable robust and repeatable methodology has seriously constrained the assessment of geological sites suitable for the National Heritage List (NHL). A desktop assessment ofAustralian desert landscapes required intrinsic natural values of a diverse group of sites, spread over a vast area, to be assessed againstNHLcriteria. The Earth Sciences Comparative Matrix (ESCoM) was developed for this study. In theESCoM, sites are grouped in process themes. Each is assessed againstNHLcriteria then compared with other similar places, according to degree of unusualness, integrity, and authenticity. A site scoring well across multiple themes has increased heritage significance. The overall values of a site are quantified, leading to a qualitative judgement on whether it achieves the threshold of outstanding heritage value. Examples of assessment using this method are given. In this methodology, significance determination is based on rigorous comparisons of specific values. It is semi-quantitative, repeatable, and robust. It differs from other geoheritage assessment methods in its combination of process-based groupings (facilitating the separation of site type from heritage criteria), matrix structure (minimising complexities of scale or diversity), and use of numerical rankings as an aid in decision-making. While the study for whichESCoMwas developed was focused on landforms, it can be used for other types of geoheritage (e.g. fossils, tectonic processes), with modification of matrix theme headings
Archaeology · Biology · Cartography · Cultural heritage · Geodiversity · Geography · Judgement · Landform · Political science · Sociology · World Wide Web · Anthropology · Building materials and conservation · Computer Science · Geological and Geochemical Analysis · Geotourism and Geoheritage Conservation · Ecology
| Citations per year | 0.5 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2018 - 2023 (6) |
| Highly cited | No |