Global multi-level mapping of visual heritage practice: Visual evaluation and management of cultural heritage

Visual experience is a primary channel through which the values of tangible cultural heritage are perceived and governed, making visual evaluation and management central to conservation and to Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 11.4. However, practice remains fragmented across scales, and many statutory toolkits lag behind advances in geographic information systems (GIS)-based visibility analysis, 3D visualization, remote sensing, and perception-based evidence. We compile, code, and cross-analyze a multi-level corpus spanning 26 international instruments, 293 national items from 112 countries, and 867 World Heritage properties. Using a four-dimensional framework (values, typology, visual-evaluation methods, and visual-management strategies), we apply k-medoids clustering with multidimensional scaling (MDS) at the national level, mask-aware association mapping at the property level, and cross-level diagnostics. Across levels, practice converges on a technical-spatial regime. At the property level, GIS-based viewshed and visual sensitivity analysis, verified visuals and 3D visualization techniques, and GIS-based spatial-historical analysis form a near-universal methodological core and are most frequently translated into zoning and spatial regulation and height or massing controls. Participatory and perception- or experience-based methods remain sporadic. Value framings are dominated by Historic, Social and Political, and Aesthetic emphases, while Ecological and Scientific are comparatively marginal. Cross-level coherence is strongest where governance frameworks are mature, and portfolios are coherent; it weakens where portfolios are heterogeneous or in federated or lower-capacity settings. National portfolios cluster into four method-strategy regimes that explain characteristic object-method-strategy sequences. In response, we outline operational bridges including tiered standards for visibility and 3D evidence, deployable perception protocols, participation modules linked to Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) or Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) triggers, and auditable communication packages. These are organized within a Global Peer Network aligned to portfolio archetypes and method-strategy regimes. The study contributes a reusable global dataset and map of visual-heritage practice and an integration framework that supports more transparent, comparable, and context-sensitive decisions across levels. • Mapped heritage visual practice across international, national, and site levels. • Used a harmonized 4D framework (type/scale, values, evaluation, management) to compare practice across levels. • Proposed an integration framework linking analytical and visualization techniques to routine governance, planning and design. • Proposed an integration framework linking evidence to zoning/design controls to strengthen visual heritage governance.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Environmental Impact Assessment Review
Published
2026-03-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2026.108404
Primary Topic
3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Global multi-level mapping of visual heritage practice: Visual evaluation and management of cultural heritage

Jingsen Lian, Yuyang Peng, Zaichen Wu, Steffen Nijhuis et al.
Environmental Impact Assessment Review
3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
article

Global multi-level mapping of visual heritage practice: Visual evaluation and management of cultural heritage

Jingsen Lian, Yuyang Peng, Zaichen Wu, Steffen Nijhuis, Gregory Bracken, Haoxiang Zhang
article en

Abstract

Visual experience is a primary channel through which the values of tangible cultural heritage are perceived and governed, making visual evaluation and management central to conservation and to Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 11.4. However, practice remains fragmented across scales, and many statutory toolkits lag behind advances in geographic information systems (GIS)-based visibility analysis, 3D visualization, remote sensing, and perception-based evidence. We compile, code, and cross-analyze a multi-level corpus spanning 26 international instruments, 293 national items from 112 countries, and 867 World Heritage properties. Using a four-dimensional framework (values, typology, visual-evaluation methods, and visual-management strategies), we apply k-medoids clustering with multidimensional scaling (MDS) at the national level, mask-aware association mapping at the property level, and cross-level diagnostics. Across levels, practice converges on a technical-spatial regime. At the property level, GIS-based viewshed and visual sensitivity analysis, verified visuals and 3D visualization techniques, and GIS-based spatial-historical analysis form a near-universal methodological core and are most frequently translated into zoning and spatial regulation and height or massing controls. Participatory and perception- or experience-based methods remain sporadic. Value framings are dominated by Historic, Social and Political, and Aesthetic emphases, while Ecological and Scientific are comparatively marginal. Cross-level coherence is strongest where governance frameworks are mature, and portfolios are coherent; it weakens where portfolios are heterogeneous or in federated or lower-capacity settings. National portfolios cluster into four method-strategy regimes that explain characteristic object-method-strategy sequences. In response, we outline operational bridges including tiered standards for visibility and 3D evidence, deployable perception protocols, participation modules linked to Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) or Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) triggers, and auditable communication packages. These are organized within a Global Peer Network aligned to portfolio archetypes and method-strategy regimes. The study contributes a reusable global dataset and map of visual-heritage practice and an integration framework that supports more transparent, comparable, and context-sensitive decisions across levels. • Mapped heritage visual practice across international, national, and site levels. • Used a harmonized 4D framework (type/scale, values, evaluation, management) to compare practice across levels. • Proposed an integration framework linking analytical and visualization techniques to routine governance, planning and design. • Proposed an integration framework linking evidence to zoning/design controls to strengthen visual heritage governance.

Environmental Impact Assessment ReviewVol. 120
University of Hong Kong (HK), South China University of Technology (CN), Delft University of Technology (NL)
Sustainable cities and communities
Openalex Percentile: Top 41%
3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.