ABSTRACT

Research focusing on climate change and cultural heritage informs heritage management and policy. Fatorić and Seekamp assessed this field up to 2015, highlighting the need for periodic reassessment of the field given the observed growth and research that documents how cultural heritage contributes to climate change mitigation and adaptation. Five years on, this systematic review reflects on the state of the art by evaluating 165 publications (2016–2020) about cultural heritage and climate change. We find the field continues to grow, and remains rich in disciplinary and methodological diversity, but predominantly represents research in and about Europe. The number of publications about integrating cultural heritage into adaptation and mitigation are increasing but remain relatively few compared to those about physical impacts on individual buildings or sites. The impact of climate change on intangible heritage has rarely been the sole focus of recent research. Although researchers are increasingly situating their research in a wider context of opportunities and barriers, vague timescales, and unspecific references to changes in the natural environment are additional limitations. This review also identified a lack of international collaboration, highlighting the urgent need for global cooperation and knowledge exchange on climate change and cultural heritage.

摘要

以气候变化和文化遗产为重点的研究为遗产管理和政策提供信息。Fatorić 和 Seekamp 对这一领域进行了评估，直至 2015 年，鉴于观察到的增长和研究记录了文化遗产如何有助于减缓和适应气候变化，因此强调需要对该领域进行定期重新评估。五年后，该系统评价通过评估 165 份关于文化遗产和气候变化的出版物（2016-2020 年）反映了最新技术水平。我们发现该领域在不断发展，并且仍然具有丰富的学科和方法多样性，但主要代表欧洲和关于欧洲的研究。关于将文化遗产纳入适应和减缓的出版物数量正在增加，但与关于对单个建筑物或地点的物理影响的出版物相比，数量仍然相对较少。气候变化对非物质遗产的影响很少成为近期研究的唯一焦点。尽管研究人员越来越多地将他们的研究置于更广泛的机会和障碍背景下，但模糊的时间尺度以及对自然环境变化的不具体提及是额外的限制。该审查还确定了缺乏国际合作，突出了在气候变化和文化遗产方面开展全球合作和知识交流的迫切需要。尽管研究人员越来越多地将他们的研究置于更广泛的机会和障碍背景下，但模糊的时间尺度以及对自然环境变化的不具体提及是额外的限制。该审查还确定了缺乏国际合作，突出了在气候变化和文化遗产方面开展全球合作和知识交流的迫切需要。尽管研究人员越来越多地将他们的研究置于更广泛的机会和障碍背景下，但模糊的时间尺度以及对自然环境变化的不具体提及是额外的限制。该审查还确定了缺乏国际合作，突出了在气候变化和文化遗产方面开展全球合作和知识交流的迫切需要。