Increasing resilience of cultural landscapes through spatial planning: a methodology for assessing the adaptiveness of policy and planning instruments

Nowadays, decision-makers and spatial planners are increasingly faced with a multitude of complex and interconnected challenges which include among others the adaptation to climate change, disaster risk reduction and the management of cultural heritage. However, there is a lack of easy-to-use resources and methodologies for them to access robust science-based knowledge and translate it into planning instruments. In addition, efforts for integrating different policy domains that are traditionally managed by siloed and specialised legislative frameworks remain limited, while weak mechanisms for monitoring and updating policy responses are put in place. This hinders the development of effective and holistic policies that could address not just one, but several societal challenges simultaneously.  

As part of the Horizon Europe funded project RescueME, aimed at increasing the resilience of coastal cultural landscapes, a methodology of policy analysis has been developed through which researchers and local experts can integrate their specific expertise. This approach is based on the collection and mapping of all relevant policy and planning tools in the sectors of spatial planning, climate change adaptation, disaster risk reduction and cultural heritage management of five case study areas across Europe, namely Neuwerk (Germany), Psiloritis (Greece), Valenca (Spain), Zadar (Croatia) and Portovenere and Cinque Terre (Italy). Through a questionnaire, key information is extracted and then used to assign rankings for an indicator-based policy assessment. The overall goal is to evaluate the adaptive capacity and the level of inclusion of provisions for cultural heritage management, climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction into existing environmental and spatial planning tools, as the basis for the development of policy recommendations tailored to local contexts and demands. 

The results reveal significant variation between tools and the different case study areas, in terms of the adaptiveness, accessibility and cross-sector coordination. However, there are also common barriers such as unclear hierarchies between different policies and administrative scales as well as gaps in the specificity of policy monitoring and review mechanisms. 

The work demonstrates how a methodology based on structured quantification of policy characteristics, combined with continuous engagement between researchers and practitioners, may facilitate closing governing gaps and strengthen the effectiveness of policies various administrative levels.