Land use and land cover analysis of cultural World Heritage to inform assessments of climate vulnerability

Bibliographic Data

ID7514761
AuthorsW P Megarry (Queen's University Belfast, corresponding author), T Venkatachalam (0000-0002-6789-0410, James Cook University), J C Day (0000-0003-3906-0759, James Cook University), Jain (0000-0002-1836-5564), S Jain (0000-0002-2250-5072, Dronah Foundation), F Heron (0000-0001-5262-6978), S F Heron (UNESCO, corresponding author)
Year2026
Volume77
Pages243-253
Publication date2026-01-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Cultural Heritage (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1296-2074 • E-ISSN: 1778-3674
PublisherElsevier BV (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1016/j.culher.2025.11.008
OpenAlexW7115716568
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited15

The UNESCO World Heritage (WH) List contains cultural and natural properties deemed to be of Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) to all humanity. Property boundaries should encompass all elements that contribute to the OUV of the property and be sufficient to protect the OUV from any natural or anthropogenic threats. Climate change-related hazards are impacting WH properties at multiple scales. In many cases, especially for slow onset hazards, existing boundaries are not sufficient to monitor and respond to change. In these cases, it can help to explore the wider landscape context. This paper considers the utility of standardised remote sensing land use and land cover (LULC) data to understand the high-level environmental classifications within and surrounding cultural and mixed WH properties. Of 11 LULC classes within the analysed dataset, 10 were present in at least one of the 49 properties in the Indian Subcontinent recognised for their cultural heritage, with the most common being Tree cover (≥5% of the area of 40 properties and/or their surrounds). Protection of cultural properties from climate-based impacts can benefit from LULC analysis by responding to known climate-related risks (e.g., flood, wildfire, etc.) on specific land cover classes. These risk profiles can be useful decision support tools for climate adaptation. The analysis is demonstrated for four case studies at three locations, using properties with a range of sizes and values. For example, trees in the broader landscape within and around Khangchendzonga National Park may encounter future impacts from temperature change (resulting in shifting biomes and changing phenology), precipitation changes (resulting in changes in rainfall and drought) and wind changes (resulting in storm damage). Each of those climate drivers increase the risk of wildfires. Additionally, LULC analysis provides valuable information on a property’s environmental context when inscribed boundaries are unknown. This study demonstrates that a systematic and reliable analysis of LULC data can provide a way to consider the broader environmental context of WH properties, complementing property values described in their Statements of OUV. However, the study also acknowledges key limitations to using LULC, including classification accuracy concerns and challenges with validation across diverse site types. Finally, this work complements a parallel thematic approach that categorises values from WH documentation to streamline assessment of climate impacts

Biome · Climate change · Cultural heritage · Land cover · Land use · Natural (archaeology · Natural heritage · Natural landscape · Vulnerability (computing · Archaeological Research and Protection · Conservation Techniques and Studies · Species Distribution and Climate Change

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access