IAIA18 Conference Proceedings | Environmental Justice in Societies in Transition
38th Annual Conference of the International Association for Impact Assessment
16-19 May 2018 | Durban Intl. Convention Center | Durban | South Africa | www.iaia.org
Is cultural heritage life saving?
Case study analysis to the relation between flood risk management and cultural
heritage
D.G. Bedeaux, E.B.J. Amsing, T. van ’t Wout, A.M. Augustyn
Introduction
Cultural heritage 1 is increasingly prone to the impact of natural hazards such as floods, landslides, and
storms. The risk of floods is considered the most common and most destructive risk for cultural heritage
(Li et al., 2017). It is expected that as a result of climate change, there will be an increase in frequency and
severity of natural hazards, including floods, in the near future (IPCC, 2012).
The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 is an international agreement, striving to
reduce disaster risk, as well as “(…) economic, physical, social, cultural and environmental assets of
persons, businesses, communities and countries (…)” (UNISDR, 2015). Also in the EU Floods Directive
(2007/60/EC) an explicit reference is made to cultural heritage (European Commission, 2007). 2
Reducing the adverse impacts that floods can have on cultural heritage is highly important, especially
within the context of climate change (Arnbjerg-Nielsen et al., 2013; Pelling, 2011). The aim of disaster risk
management (DRM) is to reduce disaster risks by trying to avoid, limit, or enhance the preparedness for
response capacity. Flood risk management thereby encompasses the three components of prevention,
mitigation, and preparedness (UNISDR, 2009).
This paper outlines various case studies, which highlight the linkages between flood risk management and
cultural heritage and how the impacts of floods have been reduced through tangible and intangible
cultural heritage as well as vice versa.
Flood risk management and cultural heritage
Comprehensive flood risk management involves, among others, conducting flood risk assessments and
developing flood risk plans and maps. Flood risk assessments are used for evaluating the risks of water
sources, such as groundwater, surface water, rivers, streams, and inundation of coastal areas due to sea
level rise. In addition, these assessments can appraise the vulnerability and potential impact on cultural
heritage structures and areas.
Emerging approaches to risk and impact assessment put emphasis on the visual and geo-spatial methods.
For instance, Li et al. (2017) proved usefulness of visual analytics for analysing flood risk and supporting
decisions on cultural heritage. Flood maps are also useful tools to show where the areas at risk of
1 Cultural heritage, as defined in the article 1 of the Convention concerning the Protection of the World Culture and natural Heritage, is rather
broad and refers to in general ‘monuments’, ‘groups of buildings’ and ‘sites’ (UNESCO, 2005), thus it is tangible. The Intangible cultural heritage
is defined in a separate document as “the practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills – as well as the instruments, objects, artefacts
and cultural spaces associated therewith – that communities, groups and, in some cases, individuals recognize as part of their cultural heritage”
(UNESCO, 2003).
2 “It is feasible and desirable to reduce the risk of adverse consequences, especially for human health and life, the environment, cultural
heritage, economic activity and infrastructure associated with floods” (European Commission, 2007).
inundation are and in particular the cultural heritage related structures. For instance, a flood map was
developed and established for the New Taipei City in Taiwan (Wang, 2014).
A mix of methods was suggested by Vojinovic et al. (2014), i.e combination of qualitative and quantitative
approaches to flood risk assessment at heritage sites. Further to this, Reiman et al. (2017) applied the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) risk framework to quantify the risks on the UNESCO
World Heritage Sites in the Mediterranean coastal area, in terms of hazard, vulnerability and exposure.
Yet, despite these efforts, little is evident about tackling the adverse impacts of floods on intangible
heritage. Most of the impact assessment in the cultural heritage and disaster context has been linked to
built infrastructure or certain natural heritage. Bond et al. (2004) argued that this may be due to the
legislation, such as the EU EIA directive, which gives priority to built and tangible heritage assets.
Fatorić and Seekamp (2017) identified the barriers to preservation of cultural heritage under changing
climate conditions and concluded that one of the most salient barriers is limited knowledge about the
intersection of climate change and cultural heritage. They argue that traditional knowledge and skills of
local communities regarding climate adaptation efforts can reinforce and strengthen heritage
preservations.
Hence, there is a need to examine current approaches to flood risk management and cultural heritage
and for new solutions, such as enhancing impact assessment practices. Genuinely, there are linkages both
ways between cultural heritage and flood risk management. Cultural heritage (tangible and intangible)
can help to reduce the impact of floods as well as the possibility to implement certain flood risk
management practices, measures and interventions that can help to mitigate the impact of floods on
cultural heritage (Figure 1).
Cultural
heritage
Flood risk
Floods
management
Figure 1 Linkages between flood risk management and cultural heritage (Source: own composition).
2
Cultural Heritage as historical example of flood risk reduction
In various countries, different cultural heritage practices contribute to prevention and mitigation of flood
risk, often coupled with the traditional land use systems. For example, in the Guadalentin catchment in
Murcia, Spain, vegetated earth-banked terraces are implemented already in historical times. These
terraces help to reduce the formation of gullies and retain water from upslope, thereby mitigating
flooding, as well as reducing the impact to infrastructure and siltation of water reservoirs. The terrace
ridge act as a sink to reduce the velocity and runoff, while the vegetation on the terrace improve the soil
structure and increasing the water infiltration capacity (De Vente, 2011).
Figure 2 Traditional vegetated earth-banked terraces in Murcia, Spain (Source: Joris de Vente, 2011).
The Guwahati Smart City Development project in India deals with the prevention of flood risk of the
Brahmaputra river. Every year the Brahmaputra river floods extensively with major risks for the
environment, local communities, and their cultural heritage. In Guwahati, temple ponds (water tanks)
were essential components of the historical water management system. These surface water bodies
sustain water flow dynamics between the highland and the lowland of the city’s landscape, functioning as
storm water reservoirs.
Historically, the temple ponds were also used for ritual bathing before entering the temple and for
drinking, washing, and fishing, serving a large community living near the temples. Unfortunately, rapid
urbanisation has taken its toll on the ‘heritage of water’. In order to protect the city of Guwahati from
flooding, it is necessary to a find solution that links the traditional knowledge systems with the design of
the renovated water system and the restoration of the water heritage assets. Achieving this requires for
local communities to work together on the restoration of water heritage and thus flood risk reduction
(Dewani, 2016; Guwahati Smart City Limited, 2017).
3
Figure 3 Jorpukhuri pond near the Ugratara temple in Guwahati, India (Source: Indiawaterportal.org).
Impact of flood risk management plans on cultural heritage
As part of the Flood Protection Program, the Netherlands invests in an extended dike reinforcement
program since 2015, reinforcing 1100 km of dikes. In many cases, an environmental impact assessment is
required. Although the program seeks to prevent damage of floods to people, structures, areas and on
cultural heritage, the dike reinforcement plan itself possibly threatens the preservation of heritage assets.
Thus paradoxically, cultural heritage is not only prone to flooding, also flood risk management plans form
a potential risk.
This is most evident in the Markermeerdijken project, which is centred around the 50-km dike that is listed
as an archaeological and built heritage site. It is an icon in the Dutch landscape and relates to the history
of the ongoing fight against water. The dike has heritage value in connection to historic town centres,
historic structures, and economic activities like farming, fishing, and international trade. Moreover, parts
of the dike are part of the UNESCO World Heritage Site the Defence Line of Amsterdam, a great example
of a defence system based on the principle of temporary flooding (inundation). The historic construction
of the dike provided information for the renovated design, but measures to the dike could as well directly
affect the dike as historical structure and heritage assets associated with it (Alliantie Markermeerdijken,
2017).
Stakeholder engagement is of high importance in order for the Flood Protection Program to be successful.
Communities residing directly at the dikes are not always in favour of the flood risk management plans.
For example, in the town of Kessel, in the Noordelijke Maasvallei, people living at the historic dike did not
support the proposed raising dike height. Paradoxically, the measures to protect the local people from
flooding, were not appreciated, because it disturbed their (visual) connection with the river. The social
4
impact of the flood risk management plan resulted in the plan to be withdrawn (Waterschap Limburg,
2017).
Figure 4 Historical buildings on the dike, town of Uitdam at the Markermeerdijk (Source: Markermeerdijken.nl).
Cultural heritage as instrument to encourage community engagement
Engagement in heritage preservation and conservation activities can encourage community involvement,
while at the same time improve flood risk management and flood remediation works. In Samarco, Brazil,
the collapse of the Fundão Dam in 2015 created tidal wave of mud (mining waste), washing across the
countryside of green valleys, villages and farmland. It has been Brazil’s worst environmental disaster,
killing nineteen people. Many local communities were affected and cultural heritage assets were damaged
and archaeologists and conservators-restorers were hired to recover the affected assets. Together with
local people, over 2300 sacred assets and fragments have been recovered and conserved. The program
helped the people not only to recover their sacred heritage together, but also to deal with the
psychological effects of the disaster (fundacaorenova.org; arqueologia.arcadislogos.com.br).
5
Figure 5 Church after the collapse of the Fundao dam, Brasil (Source: patrimoniocultural.blog.br).
Conclusions
Flood risk, within the context of climate change, is currently considered as one of the most important risks
to cultural heritage. Cultural heritage could be directly affected by flooding, as the examples of the annual
flooding of the Brahmaputra river in Guwahati and the mud stream that resulted in the collapse of the
Fundão Dam in Brazil, have shown. Flood risk management and community engagement go hand in hand
with the prevention of flood risk (India) and the recovery of flood damage to heritage assets (Brazil).
Flood risk management plans help to prevent or limit the impact of flooding on cultural heritage, but at
the same time can form a risk to the preservation of cultural heritage itself, as the Markermeerdijken
project exemplifies. Here, the dike is a monument itself, being an icon in the historical landscape. The
historic construction of the dike provided information for the renovated design.
The relationship between water and heritage has determined how people have managed disaster risks
caused by floods. This is achieved by technical interventions and adapting living patterns of communities
(Jigyasu, 2015). Cultural heritage practices and traditional knowledge about water management systems
can contribute to the prevention and mitigation of flood risks, as the examples above have outlined.
6
At the global and local level, still, too little attention is paid to the importance of preventing adverse flood
impacts on cultural heritage. More concerted efforts are therefore needed, in order to better manage the
related risks and embed mitigation mechanisms into relevant legislation, strategies and plans as well as
awareness raising and building capacities of the communities at risk.
Cultural heritage offers the opportunity to prevent and mitigate flood risks and add to the quality of the
environment by incorporating tangible and intangible heritage as an integral aspect in the design process.
The objective is not only to protect cultural heritage for the future, but also to be able to tell the story and
involve the local community in preservation and conservation efforts. Connecting with the local
community and intangible heritage creates added value and helps to protect tangible heritage for future
purposes.
References
Alliantie Markermeerdijken, 2017. Versterking Markermeerdijken: MER Markermeerdijken (AMMD-
001028/17.0129609). Hoogheemraadschap Hollands Noorderkwartier, Heerhugowaard.
Arnbjerg-Nielsen K., Willems P., Olsson, J., Beecham, S., Pathirana, A., Bu ̈low Gregersen, I., Madsen, H.,
Nguyen V.T.V. 2013. Impacts of climate change on rainfall extremes and urban drainage systems: a
review. Water Science Technology, 68(1): 16–28.
Bond, A., Langstaff, L., Baxter, R., Kofoed, H-G., W., J., Lisitzin, K and Lundstrom, S. 2004. Dealing with
the cultural heritage aspect of environmental impact assessment in Europe. Impact Assessment and
Project Appraisal 22.1 (2004): 37-45.
De Vente, 2011. Vegetaed earth-banked terraces (Spain). Wocat SLM Technologies. Available at:
https://qcat.wocat.net/af/wocat/technologies/view/technologies_1516/.
Dewani, U., 2016. Forgotten water bearers of Guwahati. India Waterportal.
Available at: http://www.indiawaterportal.org/articles/forgotten-water-bearers-guwahati.
European Commission, 2007. Directive 2007/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23
October 2007 on the assessment and management of flood risks.
Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/flood_risk/key_docs.htm
Fatorić, S. and E. Seekamp, 2017. Securing the Future of Cultural Heritage by Identifying Barriers to and
Strategizing Solutions for Preservation under Changing Climate Conditions. Sustainability (2017-9, 2143):
1-20.
Guwahati Smart City Limited, 2017. Feasibility Report for Brahmaputra Riverfront Development Project
(TCE.10477A-CV-3000-FR-30007). Tata Consultancy Engineers Limited & Arcadis, Guwahati.
Jigyasu, R., 2015. Reinforcing the link between Water and Heritage in order to build Disaster Resilient
Societies, in W.J.H. Willems and H.P.J. van Schaik (eds.), Water & Heritage: Material, conceptual and
spiritual connections. Sidestone Press Academics, Leiden.
7
IPCC. 2012. Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation.
A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field,
C.B., V. Barros, T.F. Stocker, D. Qin, D.J. Dokken, K.L. Ebi, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, G.-K. Plattner,
S.K. Allen, M. Tignor, and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New
York, NY, USA.
Li, H., Zhang, J., Sun, J. and Wang, J. 2017. A visual analytics approach for flood risk analysis and decision-
making in cultural heritage. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing. Volume 41, August 2017: 89-99.
Pelling, M. 2011. Adaptation to climate change: from resilience to transformation. Routledge, London
Reimann, L., Athanasios T., Vafeidis, S. B. 2017. UNESCO World Heritage at risk from coastal flooding in
the Mediterranean region –Is it possible to evaluate the costs of flood impacts on cultural heritage?
UNESCO, 2003. Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. Paris.
Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001325/132540e.pdf
UNESCO, 2005. Basic Texts of the 1972 World Heritage Convention. Paris.
Available at: http://whc.unesco.org/uploads/activities/documents/activity-562-4.pdf
UNISDR, 2009. 2009 UNISDR Terminology on Disaster Risk Reduction. Geneva
UNISDR, 2015. Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction. 2015-2030. Geneva.
Available at: https://www.preventionweb.net/files/43291_sendaiframeworkfordrren.pdf
Vojinovic, Z., Hammond, M., Golub, D., Hirunsalee, S., Weesakul, S. Meesuk, V., Medina, N., Sanchez, A.,
Kumara, S., Abbott, M. 2015. Holistic approach to flood risk assessment in areas with cultural heritage: a
practical application in Ayutthaya, Thailand. Natural Hazards (2016) 81: 589-616.
Available at: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11069-015-2098-7.pdf
Wang, J-J., 2014. Flood risk maps to cultural heritage: Measures and process. Journal of Cultural
Heritage, 16(2): 210-220.
Available at:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262490311_Flood_risk_maps_to_cultural_heritage_Measur
es_and_process
Waterschap Limburg, 2017. Memo Kessel uit de Waterwet. Waterschap Limburg, Roermond.
Online sources:
Arcadis, 2017. Tour Capela Nossa Senhora da Conceiçao. Tour Capela Santo Antonio.
Available at: http://arqueologia.arcadislogos.com.br/.
Fundacao Renova, 2018. Program 12: Historical, Cultural and Artistic Memory.
Available at: http://www.fundacaorenova.org/en/program/historical-cultural-and-artistic-memory/.
