Climate change is wreaking havoc on World Cultural Heritage sites, study finds – Mongabay

Report on Climate Change Impacts on World Heritage Sites and Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary: Climate Stress and Cultural Heritage

A recent global assessment reveals a critical threat to the world’s cultural and natural heritage, directly challenging the objectives of Sustainable Development Goal 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), particularly Target 11.4, which calls for the protection of these irreplaceable assets. The study indicates that climate change is placing a significant burden on a vast majority of UNESCO World Heritage sites, necessitating urgent action in line with SDG 13 (Climate Action) and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals).

• 80% of UNESCO World Cultural Heritage sites are currently experiencing climate-related stress.
• 19% of sites, constructed from vulnerable materials like wood and stone, face heightened threats from climatic factors such as extreme heat, humidity, and aridity.
• The study underscores that no single emissions mitigation pathway can uniformly protect all sites, highlighting the complexity of achieving global climate and heritage preservation goals.
• A significant Global North-South divide in conservation capacity impedes progress towards SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), as nations in the Global South lack equitable resources for heritage protection.

Climate Action Scenarios and Heritage Viability (SDG 13)

The report links greenhouse gas emission trajectories directly to the future of world heritage. The findings present a clear case for accelerated climate action as a primary strategy for heritage preservation.

1. Low-Emission Pathway: Adherence to a 1.5°C warming limit, a core tenet of SDG 13, could protect approximately 40% of currently threatened sites. This scenario represents the most effective path to safeguarding cultural heritage for future generations.
2. Medium-Emission Pathway: The current global trajectory, leading to 2.5-3°C of warming, would result in far fewer sites being spared. This path significantly undermines efforts under SDG 11.4.

The research analyzed climate risks across past (1961-91), present (2010-40), and future (2070-2100) periods, providing a site-level index of climate stress to help prioritize conservation efforts where budgets are limited.

Regional Disparities and the Imperative for Reduced Inequalities (SDG 10)

A stark divide exists in the capacity for heritage conservation, reflecting broader global inequalities that SDG 10 aims to address. While over 40% of affected sites are in Europe and North America, nations in the Global South face compounded climate events with fewer resources for mitigation and adaptation.

Material-Specific Threats Across Climate Zones:

• Subtropical Coastal Regions (e.g., Brazil, Morocco): Sites face severe threats from salt spray, erosion, and storm surges.
• Tropical Monsoon Regions (e.g., Southeast Asia): Stone structures like Angkor and Borobudur are exposed to high heat, humidity, and heavy rainfall, which can trigger secondary damage from invasive plants and termites.
• Arid Regions (e.g., Middle East): Alternating high temperatures and low humidity cause expansion and contraction in materials, leading to cracking in stone and brick structures, such as those in Isfahan, Iran.
• Temperate Regions (e.g., Europe): Increased frequency of heatwaves and dry wind events are raising concerns for sites like the Old City of Zamość in Poland.

Pathways to Collaborative Conservation (SDG 17)

The report concludes that preserving world heritage is a collective responsibility requiring robust international cooperation, as outlined in SDG 17. The challenges, particularly the lack of monitoring technology and funding in the Global South, necessitate innovative partnership models.

Recommendations for Action:

1. Establish Global Partnerships: High-capacity countries can contribute through “flying labs”—mobile expert teams that provide restoration skills, conservation technology, and training to under-resourced regions.
2. Promote Inclusive Strategies: Adapting and integrating traditional knowledge into conservation practices is essential for creating sustainable and inclusive long-term solutions.
3. Address Natural Heritage (SDG 14 & SDG 15): The scope of the climate threat extends to natural heritage sites. Extreme ocean temperatures are causing frequent bleaching of the Great Barrier Reef (SDG 14), and extreme weather threatens landscapes in sites like Spain’s Andalusia (SDG 15).
4. Uphold Local Governance: While international intervention is crucial, final decisions on conservation must remain with regional and local governing bodies to ensure culturally appropriate and effective outcomes.

Ultimately, both cultural and natural heritage conservation is intrinsically linked to global climate action. Reducing emissions remains the most critical step, requiring a unified global effort to prevent the irreversible loss of humanity’s shared heritage and achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.

Analysis of the Article in Relation to Sustainable Development Goals

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

   The article addresses several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) due to its focus on the intersection of climate change, cultural heritage, and global inequality.

   • SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities: This goal is directly relevant as it includes a specific target to protect the world’s cultural and natural heritage. The article’s central theme is the threat that climate change poses to UNESCO World Heritage sites like the Great Wall of China and Petra.
   • SDG 13: Climate Action: The article is fundamentally about the impacts of climate change. It discusses how rising global temperatures, extreme heat, humidity, and other climatic factors are causing “climate stress” on heritage sites and emphasizes that reducing greenhouse gas emissions is vital for their protection.
   • SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities: The article explicitly identifies a “Global North-South divide in heritage conservation.” It highlights that low- and middle-income countries in the Global South lack the resources, funding, and technology to preserve their cultural sites compared to nations in the Global North, thus connecting the issue to global inequality.
   • SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals: The article concludes that preserving heritage sites requires “collective efforts” and “collective responsibility.” It suggests solutions like “flying labs,” where high-capacity countries provide technical assistance and training to under-resourced regions, which directly relates to fostering global partnerships for sustainable development.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

   Based on the issues discussed, several specific SDG targets can be identified:

   • Target 11.4: Strengthen efforts to protect and safeguard the world’s cultural and natural heritage. The entire article is an analysis of the threats to cultural heritage sites. It mentions that “80% of UNESCO World Cultural Heritage sites are facing climate stress,” directly addressing the need to strengthen protection efforts.
   • Target 13.1: Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries. The article details how heritage sites are vulnerable to climate-related hazards. It describes how different climate zones pose specific risks, such as “salt spray, erosion and storm surges” in coastal regions and “thermal stress” from high temperatures in arid regions, underscoring the need to build resilience.
   • Target 13.2: Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning. The article discusses different emission pathways (“low-emission” vs. “medium-emission”) and their consequences for heritage sites. It states that reducing emissions is “vital to any solution,” implying the need for global and national policies to mitigate climate change.
   • Target 10.a: Implement the principle of special and differential treatment for developing countries. The article’s focus on the “Global North-South divide” where “Global South nations do not have the same resources to preserve their cultural sites” aligns with this target. The suggestion of “flying labs” is a practical example of providing specialized support to developing countries to help them overcome resource gaps.
   • Target 17.9: Enhance international support for implementing effective and targeted capacity-building in developing countries to support national plans to implement all the sustainable development goals. The article points out the “lack of documentation and monitoring technologies in the developing countries of the Global South.” The proposed solution of “flying labs” that “bring restoration skills, conservation technologies and training directly to under-resourced regions” is a direct call for the kind of capacity-building described in this target.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

   The article provides several quantitative and qualitative indicators that can be used to measure progress.

   • For Target 11.4:
     • Quantitative Indicator: The percentage of UNESCO World Heritage sites under “climate stress.” The article provides a baseline figure of 80%.
     • Quantitative Indicator: The percentage of sites constructed of materials (e.g., wood and stone) susceptible to climate threats. The article states this is nearly one in five sites (19%).
   • For Target 13.1 and 13.2:
     • Quantitative Indicator: Global greenhouse gas emission trajectories and associated temperature rise. The article contrasts a “low-emission” path (below 1.5°C) with the current trajectory toward a “medium-emission” path (2.5-3°C warming). Progress could be measured by how closely the world aligns with the low-emission path.
     • Qualitative Indicator: The frequency and severity of extreme climate events affecting heritage sites, such as the “more frequent heatwaves and dry wind events” mentioned in the context of Europe.
   • For Target 10.a:
     • Qualitative Indicator: The disparity in access to conservation resources (funding, advanced skills, monitoring technology) between Global North and Global South nations. The article describes this as a significant gap.
   • For Target 17.9:
     • Qualitative/Quantitative Indicator: The number and effectiveness of international support initiatives. The article suggests “flying labs” as a potential initiative; progress could be measured by the implementation and reach of such programs.

4. Create a table with three columns titled ‘SDGs, Targets and Indicators” to present the findings from analyzing the article. In this table, list the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), their corresponding targets, and the specific indicators identified in the article.

   SDGs	Targets	Indicators Identified in the Article
   SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities	11.4: Strengthen efforts to protect and safeguard the world’s cultural and natural heritage.	Percentage of UNESCO World Heritage sites facing climate stress (stated as 80%). Percentage of sites made of threatened materials like stone and wood (stated as 19%).
   SDG 13: Climate Action	13.1: Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards. 13.2: Integrate climate change measures into national policies.	Global greenhouse gas emission pathways (low vs. medium emission scenarios). Projected global temperature rise (1.5°C vs. 2.5-3°C). Frequency of extreme climate events (e.g., heatwaves, dry winds) affecting sites.
   SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities	10.a: Implement the principle of special and differential treatment for developing countries.	The described disparity in access to conservation resources (funding, skills, technology) between Global North and Global South nations.
   SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals	17.9: Enhance international support for implementing effective and targeted capacity-building in developing countries.	The call for “collective efforts” and “collective responsibility.” The proposed implementation of initiatives like “flying labs” to transfer skills and technology to under-resourced regions.

Source: news.mongabay.com