Thematic analysis and characterisation to support climate vulnerability assessments of cultural World Heritage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
• Climate change is affecting all types of World Heritage properties. • Comprehensive assessment of impacts for all individual sites is challenging. • This framework systematically groups properties based on their cultural values. • The novel thematic analysis methodology is demonstrated for sites in south Asia. • Understanding climate vulnerability can inform practical management strategies. Climate change is ubiquitous and progressively more evident than other threats, affecting all types of World Heritage. However, comprehensive assessments of climate impacts upon all individual heritage properties are improbable given the extent and urgency of the challenge. Grouping properties by their similar values, common threats and/or geographic co-location is one approach to accelerate the evaluation of climate risk. This paper develops and demonstrates a thematic analysis methodology for grouping properties into themes and sub-themes based upon their similar cultural heritage characteristics. Defining thematically representative groups of properties can inform and facilitate assessments of climate vulnerability of properties with similar values, as well as enabling strategic networks of site managers whose responsibilities include managing similar threats. The Indian Subcontinent was selected for this analysis due to the variety of cultural World Heritage properties spread over a range of natural settings and climatic regions. The 49 properties analysed include some that are widely recognised (e.g., Taj Mahal, Red Fort Complex), as well as other lesser known but no less significant cultural locations. The framework developed here is a valuable standalone tool for decision making providing a practical management strategy that can aid policy and practice; however, it also contributes to a broader understanding of the climate vulnerability and risk to cultural heritage. Eight cultural thematic groups developed here were standardised and validated against existing international cultural heritage categories to ensure transferability to other geographical and heritage regions. Within these, 71 sub-themes were identified that reflect region-specific heritage aspects. Beyond climate-change applications, the thematic framework and outcomes have potential to influence heritage management more broadly.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".